PS retweeted
Let's take a walk through the "American justice system," shall we?
Sharmake Omar is the Somali man who filmed Shiloh Hendrix on the playground in Minnesota that day in April 2025.
In January 2022, he and another Somali man "allegedly" spent two days raping an underage foster care runaway in a trailer, keeping her falsely imprisoned.
In March 2025, all charges were dismissed "in the interest of justice."
Weeks later, in April 2025, he turned his camera phone on at the playground after a young Somali thief attempted to steal from a White mom, Shiloh Hendrix, and began haranguing that White mom for having said the word "nigger." Omar demanded that Hendrix repeat the word on camera, which she did - four times, while Omar himself said the word five times in the less-than-one-minute video.
Four long months later, multiple "disorderly conduct" charges were maliciously brought against Shiloh Hendrix for the playground incident in which she was the only victim, and Sharmake Omar was the videographer.
Then, last night, Shiloh Hendrix was CONVICTED - specifically for saying "nigger" to Sharmake Omar AFTER he demanded she say it, while he himself said it repeatedly. Her sentence is a $1,000 fine and 200 hours of community service.
By the way, Sharmake Omar WAS NEVER CALLED TO TESTIFY in the Hendrix trial.
But don't worry, that's not all the justice we have in store for today. Just keep the substance of Shiloh's "crime" - as well as her sentence - in mind as we move forward.
Rewind to April 2020. That's when Sharmake Omar, our favorite Somali videographer, along with another Somali friend of his (separate from his alleged co-raper), committed a violent assault in the street. Omar threw a rock at a car, then attacked and beat the 16-year-old driver. A bystander tried to intervene, but Omar's accomplice threatened him with a knife.
For this, Sharmake Omar was charged merely with DISORDERLY CONDUCT. Yes, for hurling a deadly weapon at a vehicle, then beating the teenage driver while his criminal pal held off onlookers at knifepoint, Omar faced the EXACT SAME CHARGE that Shiloh Hendrix faced for saying a word that Omar asked her to say, as she held her child in her arms and fled the playground before Omar could assault her, too.
Like Shiloh Hendrix, Sharmake Omar was convicted on his count of disorderly conduct.
His sentence?
A $200 fine.
That's it. That's the entire thing.
So, to review:
Rape an underage foster child for two days (allegedly)? Clean slate.
Hurl a deadly weapon at a car and assault its driver? $200.
Say a word to an accused rapist/kidnapper and convicted violent criminal who demands you say it while saying it himself? $1,000 and 200 hours - not to mention international infamy.
Could the anti-White standard be any more egregiously in our faces?
Seriously, everyone involved in prosecuting the Shiloh Hendrix case is unspeakably evil. This includes, but is not limited to:
~ Rochester City Attorney Michael Spindler-Krage
~ Lead prosecutor Nicholas Shabel
~ Judge Christa Daily, who ensured Shiloh's conviction
~ The Rochester NAACP
~ Rochester's "Community Engagement Response Team"
~ Rochester Mayor Kim Norton
~ Rochester City Council President Randy Schubring
~ Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison
~ Minnesota's Council on American-Islamic Relations
~ Sharmake Omar, without whom none of this would have happened
~ The young Somali thief's non-English speaking parents
~ Innumerable members of the local Somali scam network
~ Six jurors - two men and four women (reportedly all White) - who unanimously agreed that White people are not protected under the US Constitution
While we're here, a special dishonorable mention must go to every single "FIRST AMENDMENT" organization in this hollowed-out country of ours. You know the ones - they relentlessly solicit and collect large sums of money to "DEFEND FREE SPEECH" while continuously, cravenly shrinking away from EVERY meaningful case where White people - LITERALLY THE ONLY GROUP WITH MAJORITY SUPPORT FOR THE FIRST AMENDMENT - are so clearly maliciously persecuted.
Similarly, NOT ONE official at any level of government has spoken up to defend Shiloh Hendrix or her Constitutional rights, nor to condemn the flagrantly anti-White, utterly unconstitutional witch hunt she's endured. Not one.
And on that note, we conclude today's review of the good ol' "American justice system."
Lady Justice isn't blind. She's anti-White. And it's never been plainer to see.
PS retweeted
Moscow's instantly-iconic exploding fuel storage tank is resulting in a flood of memes. I'll add a selection below...
PS retweeted
I don’t understand all these multi-layered theories about whether Ukraine should hand over the Donbas to Russia, whether it should keep fighting, or whether it would be better to accept Putin’s terms now or later.
What makes you think Ukraine actually has a real choice?
Who told you that ‘agreeing to Putin’s terms’ = getting a ‘long-term and stable peace’ -- even at the cost of colossal humiliation and unfair, absurd concessions forced on Ukraine under pressure from the Kremlin’s useful idiots in the White House?
What makes you think that after Ukraine theoretically gives up its last strongholds in the Donbas, massively weakens its defenses and armed forces, abandons Western military aid and long-range weapons, and is left with fake ‘security guarantees’ that no Western country would ever go to war over -- Putin will simply stop, leave Ukraine alone forever, and not once again invent some arbitrary propaganda pretext, rebuild his strength, and launch a new offensive from a far more favorable position to finish off Ukraine completely?
What makes you think this latest fuss is a path to real peace and an end to the war, rather than a political way to achieve through Trump what Russia hasn’t been able to accomplish against Ukraine on the battlefield for four years?
Who even told you this would be ‘peace’?
Putin? Witkoff? Trump? Kirill Dmitriev?
Come back down to earth.
If only thing were that simple -- that you hand over the battered Donbas, freeze the front line, promise not to join NATO, which is half-dead anyway, and voilà, everything is settled and you get peace and calm.
PS retweeted
"Elon Musk is not an engineer."
John Carmack: Elon is definitely an engineer. He is deeply involved with technical decisions at SpaceX and Tesla. He doesn’t write code or do CAD today, but he is perfectly capable of doing so.
Robert Zubrin: When I met Elon it was apparent to me that although he had a scientific mind and he understood scientific principles, he did not know anything about rockets. Nothing. That was in 2001, by 2007 he knew everything about rockets – he really knew everything, in detail. You have to put some serious study in to know as much about rockets as he knows now. This doesn't come just from hanging out with people.
Eric Berger: Elon is the chief engineer in name and reality.
Josh Boehm: Elon is both the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Technology Officer of SpaceX, so of course he does more than just some very technical work. He is integrally involved in the actual design and engineering of the rocket, and at least touches every other aspect of the business. Elon is an engineer at heart, and that’s where and how he works best.
Garrett Reisman: He’s obviously skilled at all different functions, but certainly what really drives him and where his passion really is, is his role as Chief Engineer. That’s the part of the job that really plays to his strengths.
Tom Mueller: Elon and the Propulsion department are leading development of the SpaceX engines, particularly Raptor.
Kevin Watson: Elon is brilliant. He’s involved in just about everything. He understands everything. If he asks you a question, you learn very quickly not to go give him a gut reaction. He wants answers that get down to the fundamental laws of physics. One thing he understands really well is the physics of the rockets. He understands that like nobody else. The stuff I have seen him do in his head is crazy. He can get in discussions about flying a satellite and whether we can make the right orbit and deliver Dragon at the same time and solve all these equations in real time. It’s amazing to watch the amount of knowledge he has accumulated over the years.
PS retweeted
What they don’t show you in this video is Iryna’s blood curdling muffled screams and terrified, helpless eyes as she was being viciously stabbed in her neck by this fucking monster.
The judges and district attorneys who have allowed criminals to roam free are literally terrorists in robes and suits. They are no different than people who allow their aggressive pit bulls (with a history of attacking humans) to roam freely on your street. They should be responsible for the monsters they unleash.
It’s time for a new era of tough on crime policies. No more cosplaying judges and DA’s, we need the real thing.
PS retweeted
This brilliant cartoon clearly explains Trump's position on Ukraine. It is in Ukrainian with English subtitles. Share it with anyone who keeps repeating russian propaganda.
PS retweeted
1/ An interesting analysis by ChatGPT on the psychological aspects of the meeting between Zelensky and Trump-Vance is circulating online.
It reveals a masterclass in gaslighting, manipulation, and coercion from Trump and his entourage. Let’s break it down.
1/n
PS retweeted
1/ Vladimir Putin is demanding that Ukraine should hold a presidential election in wartime. Nazi Germany demanded the same of Britain in July 1942. This is the story of why the UK delayed holding elections throughout World War II. ⬇️
PS retweeted
The collapse of the Assad regime is for Russia a far worse catastrophe than most realize. It will take me many posts and you will see more and more like this coming the coming days and weeks. Here, I will show the implications on Africa.
As it is well known, one of Russia's "business models" is to prop up dictatorships and putschist regimes all around the globe, including Africa. Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger and the Central African Republic are just a few to name of. The Sudanese Civil war is even directly kept on fire by Russia. The latest peace process by the UNSC was stopped by Russia's veto. War and suffering are not only a good business for the Russian war industry, the only operational industry in Russia, but especially for their most infamous mercenary group, Wagner.
In exchange for Russia's help, to prop up those scourge regimes across Africa, Wagner received direct control of lucrative deals for mining operations, especially gold and blood diamonds. The exploitation operations are executed in the most ruthless way, with utter disregard on human life, killing locals and foreigners alike, even Chinese worker. After all, this has always been Wagner number one revenue.
However, logistically, Russia always relied on the Syrian bases to fly out the riches and fly in mercenaries. They always had to pass Khmeimim when going in either direction. It is also safe to assume that much of the operations in Africa were coordinated in Khmeimim. Without this base, all operations in Africa were virtually impossible or the very least much harder to accomplish. And harder means, more expensive.
This "business model" could only thrive for as long as the puppet Assad was in Damascus, which as we all know is history. What this will mean for the putschist regimes and Wagner alike, remains to be seen, but it might give the African people suffering under them and Wagner a new chance to get rid off the Russian influence, the same way as the Syrian people ended it.
PS retweeted
Top British attorney Natasha Hausdorff broke the Internet by exposing the biggest lie ever told about Israel.
Western politicians and journalists are in panic mode over this viral video.
PS retweeted
Jeff Bezos being too afraid of Trump to allow the Post to endorse Kamala is probably a better argument for how dangerous Trump is than anything the Post's editorial board would've written.
PS retweeted
10 reasons the Kurds are more deserving of a state than the Palestinians.
- Kurds are the largest stateless minority group in the Middle East with 40M people and a national identity going back centuries, unlike the Palestinians.
- Kurds have a distinct language and ethnicity, unlike the Palestinians.
- Kurds are tolerant, inclusive and religiously diverse, unlike the Palestinians.
- Kurds were promised a state of their own by the British in 1920, when “Palestinian” still meant Jew.
- Kurds actually experienced genocide during the late 1980s with chemical weapons, unlike the Palestinians.
- Kurds have a history of successful self government without attacking their neighbors, unlike the Palestinians.
- Kurds don’t deny the existence of other Middle Eastern states or people, unlike most Palestinians.
- Kurds have been the vanguard fighting against Islamic State, Al Qaeda and others, unlike the Palestinians who have embraced and supported Islamic militancy.
- Kurds fought to protect other ethnic and religious minorities like the Yazidis, Jews, Assyrians and Chaldeans, unlike the Palestinians who oppress non Muslim minorities.
- The Kurdish national slogan “Jîn, Jîyan, Azadî” (Women, Life, Freedom) is more universal and acceptable than the uncompromising Palestinian slogan “From the River to the Sea.”
None of this means Palestinians shouldn’t eventually have a state of their own that can’t threaten its neighbors and minorities, but the Kurds are far more deserving.
PS retweeted
No surprises in today's non-binding ICJ opinion about Israeli settlements:
The question (What are the legal consequences arising from the ongoing violation by Israel ...) presupposed the answer, and the answer was a restatement of its 2004 Wall opinion. And yet... 🧵
PS retweeted
Dastardly David, Gentleman Goliath and the Underdog Syndrome
It’s natural to cheer on the underdog – after all, who can’t help but encourage the plucky young bloke taking on a vastly more experienced and far bigger pugilist in the ring, only to win through sheer determined effort and some clever moves, whilst he leaps nimbly from foot to foot?
The classical underdog story is David and Goliath; the former, a fresh-faced youngster with nothing but a slingshot, standing up to the barbarian behemoth Goliath covered in armour and wielding a giant sword. The irony is that David is a young Jew and Goliath an older Philistine, and today we have the positions reversed with David being the poor, battered Philistine standing up to the incredibly powerful Israeli Goliath.
Naturally, the uninformed will want to root for David since all he has to counter Goliath’s weapons are some AK47 rifles, a few machine guns and some harmless rockets. Goliath, on the other hand, has a fearsome array of weapons, including laser-guided 2,000lbs bombs, tanks, drones, F-35 aircraft and that’s just for breakfast. The brave Philistine fighters are putting up a valiant fight against their arch-nemesis and oppressor, who despite his incredibly overwhelming and ferocious weapons has apparently failed to beat him to the ground.
Let’s drop the metaphor, since we are basically past it at this juncture. All the supporters of the Gazans would have you believe is that Israel is wantonly slashing and burning its way through Gaza, killing everything in sight and razing every building it sees to the ground. Ever since the grotesque, libelous letter was published by the Lancet (teapawt.net/daniepstein_com/status…), the civilian death toll has sky-rocketed from the original and already ludicrous figure of 37,000 (debunked here: teapawt.net/daniepstein_com/status…) to a stratospheric 186,000.
Is Israel a hulking, destructive and mass-murdering Goliath? Are Hamas and ordinary Gazans embroiled in active fighting a fresh-faced David? Let’s see.
On the 6th of October 2023, there was still a cease-fire between Israel and Hamas. No-one seriously expected a direct attack on Israeli soil; hence people went about celebrating Shabbat and Simchat Torah as usual, and a peace music festival was held in a field less than 2km from the Gaza border. When the attack commenced, the police, army and other forces had a hard time believing it was actually happening.
By the time the full extent of the horror was understood, 1,200 lives had been in lost in a brutal spree of pillaging, raping, murdering, torturing and hostage-taking. Israel and World Jewry was in shock. Not since the mind-numbing inhumanity of the Holocaust had Jews experienced such a horrific episode. The carnage, the delight terrorist took in their appalling, revolting attack was simply incomprehensible.
Needless to say that accompanying the shock and grief was a seething rage. Despite having given Gazan’s autonomy in 2005 at the ignominious expense of over 10,000 Jews, all that the so-called Palestinians (teapawt.net/daniepstein_com/status…) had repaid in gratitude was death, destruction and violence. This was the final straw.
At this juncture, Israel had a casus belli of epic proportions. They could have quite rightly razed Gaza to the ground in their attempts to retrieve their hostages and wipe Hamas off the face of the earth. Moreso, GoPro videos that Hamas themselves published online showed Gazans in civilian clothing participating in the massacre. Whilst this did not make all the Gazan civilians complicit, it certainly broadened the scope of culpability. After all, now they were seeking much more than simply the estimated 45,000 Hamas terrorists; now they were after thousands of Gazans who either participated directly in the slaughter, took civilians hostage or dragged their bodies through the streets.
It's worth considering what the IDF brings to the table in terms of military capability. The air force alone consists of over 300 aircraft gen-4 and gen-5 fighters, equipped with Israeli-developed avionics and sensors unique to the IDF, capable of launching sophisticated missiles and guided gravity munitions. They have hundreds of tanks and artillery pieces, 169,000 active personnel and a reserve army of roughly 465,000. The Israeli Navy has a slew of sophisticated surface and submarine vessels capable of firing shells and launching missiles from great distances. Given the will on the part of the Israelis, Gaza could have been flattened into rubble in a matter of a couple of hours; by the time the world would have commenced protesting, the strip would have been a smoking ruin, its citizens bombed to kingdom come.
Yet this did not happen. Much everyone’s surprise, the Israeli government sat on its haunches for three weeks. Some small operations were carried out almost immediately, but the full ground invasion took three weeks to mobilise. During that process, the IDF formulated a plan that would require the mass movement of citizens in the strip, and in order to execute this plan they undertook heretofore unheard-of steps to prevent as many civilians dying as possible, employing leaflet drops, robocalls, text messages and direct calls by specially trained IDF members. Israel has formidable electronic capabilities that according to John Spencer, Chair of Urban War Studies at the MWI, West Point, no other army has. They employed all of these in their efforts to prevent a slaughter.
As the war drew on, the IDF realised that Hamas were using the IDF’s strengths and morality against them, ensuring higher casualties than were predicted. For example, Hamas prevented their own citizens from following evacuation orders in order to use them as human shields (reuters.com/world/middle-eas…); when people were evacuating Hamas shot at them. When the IDF attempted to shield the evacuees, Hamas attacked the soldiers protecting the civilians. Hamas even faked IDF leaflets telling citizens that evacuation corridors were only for emergencies. When it comes to distributing aid, Hamas are not below hijacking the lorries and preventing their own people from accessing food, hygiene supplies and other basic requisites. People who protested that Hamas had gone too far should surrender were beaten or shot. There is nothing new about this; when Hamas took over the Gaza strip in 2007 they engaged in fratricide at an appalling level (theguardian.com/world/2007/j…), and they have consistently used their own citizens as human shields (stratcomcoe.org/cuploads/pfi…).
In order to counter these tactical abuses of civilians, the IDF developed new strategies, employing sophisticated electronics to scan known Hamas phones, using long range ID systems and filtering civilians for terrorists using human intelligence.
Hamas in the meanwhile were abusing every possible law they could; aside from holding civilian hostages captive (including babies) as bargaining chips, they fought the IDF in civilian clothing from inside civilian structures. The Gaza Metro – a network of over 600km of tunnels – allowed them to pop out almost anywhere, from under houses, mosques, hospitals and schools, run into a building and break out the weapons cached there. They would manoeuvre into position, take some shots and then drop their weapons to join the civilians in the area. Almost every building the IDF has entered has contained weapons; even protected status buildings such as hospital, schools and mosques are riddled with armaments and explosives (cbsnews.com/news/israel-phot… youtube.com/watch?v=7gLABy9s… thecipherbrief.com/a-look-in…). Hamas are not beyond using captures Israeli uniforms to disguise themselves as IDF soldiers, allowing them to manoeuvre in the open. They cynically baited the IDF into believing a WCK convoy was a Hamas one by firing off guns from on top of the vehicles (breitbart.com/middle-east/20…). If there is a humanitarian or warfare law or custom that Hamas has not broken, it is because it is so obscure that practically no-one has heard of it.
All of this has slowed down the progress of the IDF. Instead of taking days, the war to date has been dragged out for almost nine months at the time of writing. Whilst the death toll of Gazans has been enormously exaggerated (teapawt.net/daniepstein_com/status…), the destruction has been widespread. At least 16% of Gaza lies in ruins. Whatever economy they had prior to the 7th has essentially evaporated. It will be a decade at least before they have a chance to enjoy self-rule, and since Israel will certainly not rebuild Gaza and perhaps claim reparations as well, the reconstruction will progress at snail’s pace.
This does beg the question: what did Hamas have in mind when they attacked Israel on the 7thin such a brutal, barbarian and animalistic fashion? Did they not expect a response of these proportions?
To answer this, some background of the situation must be fleshed out. On the 6th, Israel was a terribly divided country, across political and religious lines. Proposed changes to the judiciary led to mass protests, and Yom Kippur prayers in the centre of Tel Aviv were disturbed by a small rabble. The country was deeply mired in conflict, and even a group of soldiers refusing to serve in protest, which came as a shock to a country whose army is almost sacrosanct.
Hamas and probably the IRGC as well saw this as a serious opportunity to hit Israel hard, expecting an overwhelming attack to weaken Israel’s morale sufficiently to perhaps mount several more such incursions. In the past, Israel’s response to Hamas terror ranged from weak to lukewarm. Operation Cast Lead (2008–2009) ended after three weeks with a mutual ceasefire; the conflict resulted in roughly 1,400 Palestinian and 13 Israeli deaths. Some 46,000 homes were destroyed, making more than 100,000 people homeless. Operation Protective Edge 2014 lasted for seven weeks with 2,000 Gazan deaths and a total of six Israeli civilians who were killed as a result of the conflict. Neither operations resulted in a decisive victory.
What is clear is that Hamas never expected such wide-spread devastation. Instead, they probably forecast another short war with Israel in disarray. Hamas would mount several incursions, capture as many hostages as they could during the operations and then withdraw to negotiate for thousands of prisoners in Israeli jails to be freed. They would be able to flee to their tunnels at any time, making the process of hunting them down almost impossible.
This plan backfired horribly for Hamas. From the very first moment, they broke every rule of armed conflict. The bestiality and brutality of the attack achieved the exact opposite of what they expected. Not only did it shake Israel out of its torpor, but it also united the country and world Jewry in a way they had never been united previously.
Within a matter of days, reservists responded with a 140% turnout; commanders were frustrated at the lack of readily available equipment for their soldiers since no-one predicted such a response. As of 9th April 2024, donations from the Diaspora raised $1.4 billion (timesofisrael.com/donations-…) and Israel Bonds sales raised a further $1.7 billion.
Israel now swore to do what they had never done before: utterly destroy Hamas. However, they made it clear that this was not going to be revenge, it was going to be justice.
Where Hamas broke every possible rule and acted like rabid barbarians, Israel took every possible step to reduce collateral damage and the expected carnage. Where Hamas simply raped, butchered and pillaged, Israel kept the IDF on a tight leash. Soldiers had very strict rules of engagement and monumental efforts were undertaken to keep civilian life functioning as well as possible under war conditions. As John Spencer writes (teapawt.net/SpencerGuard/status/18…): “Israel has gone above and beyond what is traditionally required of armies. In Gaza, they faced 40,000 enemy defenders in dense urban terrain featuring some 400 miles of deep buried military tunnels a depth of 15 to over 200 feet deep purposely built under civilian and protected sites. The defenders were equipped with over 15,000 rockets and a full array of small arms, mortars, and improvised explosive devices. The enemy had defenses that took at least fifteen years to prepare and fortify. Hamas held over 200 hostages, disguised themselves as civilians, and used ordinary Gazans as human shields to manipulate external actors, especially the United States, to stop Israel from escalating and instead to push for a ceasefire. Largely because of Egypt, there was almost no possibility for the 2.2. million civilians in Gaza to completely flee the war zone by land.”
Ultimately, Israel at war is the consummate gentleman; moral, considerate and firm in its mission to protect its people. Hamas, conversely, are the very embodiment of evil, with a callous disregard for its own people and cynically abusing the laws and customs of war for their own nefarious gains. Hamas is no fresh-faced David with his little slingshot. Hamas is a wildly immoral and bestial death cult with absolutely no regard for the very people that elected them.
Despite all this, the world does not see Hamas in its true light. Gazans are painted as innocent victims who are suffering under the brutality of the Israeli war machine. The appalling crimes against humanity that Hamas committed are either brushed under the carpet or denied outright, despite the copious evidence supplied by Hamas themselves. The incredible efforts of the IDF to prevent civilian casualties, and the unspeakable attacks Israel suffered are not simply ignored but distorted all out of recognition.
Why is this? How is it that the picture has been so successfully reversed?
Behind all of the various theories that might explain this is the IRGC and other bad actors, as discussed in this post: teapawt.net/daniepstein_com/status….
What allows these machinations to succeed is partially due to the nature of people wanting to cheer on the underdog. This is the cognitive dissonance of beer glasses – the mind only shows you what you want to see, not what you actually observe. It is also the fact that Jew-hatred has festered at every level since the very founding of Jewry, and this war has allowed Jew-haters across the globe to sanitise their anti-Semitism through the filter of anti-Zionism, which they then vomit onto their sheeple audiences through the medium of social media. The confluence of these impulses results in a narrative that paints the victim as the oppressor, and elevates raping, murdering, butchering and hostage-taking barbarian troglodytes to near-sainthood.
This is not a David and Goliath conflict. This is a conflict of barbarianism versus civilisation. And it’s coming to the West.
Wokism, the new face of terror
On the 23rd September 2019 the UN had the distinct honour of having a barely educated teenager patronise them with the now-(in)famous phrase: “How dare you?”
It beggars the question as to how on earth this sixteen year old child was ever given the floor at such an august body, let alone taken seriously. Did she have a relevant PhD? Had she made some great new climate-related discovery? Alas not. As it turns out, not only was she not some wunderkind scientist, she was hardly a star pupil. Yet in a storm of euphoria, Greta Thunberg was feted as the saviour of mankind, the environment and unsliced bread.
What precipitated this ludicrous state of affairs? Are we still in the thrall of whatever madness facilitated the beatification of Saint Greta?
To answer this, we have to cast our minds back to just over fifty years ago, when Greenpeace was founded. It’s stated goal is to “ensure the ability of the Earth to nurture life in all its diversity", which all things being equal is very nice; it’s hard to disagree with wanting to nurture life.
Initially they were protesting nuclear testing, then they branched out to ban commercial whaling and it grew from there.
For several decades they were a household name, famous for various exploits that hit the news across the globe, and yet today they seemed to be relegated into retirement with most gen-Z’ers probably having never heard of them at all.
This is the fate of many such organisations: there is a bell-curve which they follow; rising slowly from anonymity then suddenly gaining rapid traction, after which they slide into obscurity at much the same pace they grew into fame.
In more recent years, organisations such as Extinction Rebellion, Antifa and BLM both enjoyed and suffered from the exposure that social media afforded them. Their dissolution and disappearance from that arena was as rapid as their rise.
What do these groups all have in common that caused them to succeed and eventually fail in this way?
This writer’s theory is quite simplistic, but nonetheless offers some insight into this phenomenon.
Initially, all these groups had a message that resonated with one demographic or another, but following a degree of success realised that they had to up their ante if they wanted to remain newsworthy. The inherent pressure to remain relevant created a dilemma: a constant need to introduce new concerns to their followers, whether or not these were a core part of their founding charter. However, even that was insufficient to keep them relevant; the succeeding stories required an even higher profile, something more exciting than preceding issues and actions.
At some point nearing their zenith, each of these organisations reached terminal velocity, at which point the good they were purporting to engage in matched the degree of inconvenience and annoyance they were causing.
Greenpeace had a series of catastrophic actions that put the kibosh on their popularity, as did Antifa, BLM, Extinction Rebellion et al. The faster they shot to fame, the quicker they reached this “equilibrium of annoyance”, and the more rapid their downfall.
When it comes to the protests for Palestinians, however, there appears to be a different mechanism at play. They, too, are an annoyance, but currently there appears to be little pushback from the public. Given their stratospheric rise to prominence, why aren’t they following the gaussian curve of the others?
The answer to this appears to be something rather sinister.
Like some of the more recent movements previously described, the Palestinian supporters are taking advantage two things: a generation brought up with the internet and particularly social media, and the rise of militant wokism.
With the advent of the internet, the hopes were that the availability of the font of almost all knowledge at people’s fingertips would result in a generation of highly educated and thoughtful individuals. The devil had the last laugh, however, since the exact reverse occurred. Gen-Z children grew up with social media, a phenomena no-one predicted, and much of what they think and believe are sourced from influencers and pundits who collectively engage in as much intellectual discourse as two drunkards fighting in the gutter outside a pub.
Vapid purveyors of products dubious and trashy, memes which encapsulated the most imbecilic of concepts, these all became the intellectual food for the pliant minds of this generation who never gained the ability to reason for themselves and were unmotivated to investigate any facts for themselves. This sowed the bed for wokism, for jumping on to every political band-wagon without a moment’s cogitation.
Smarter minds than they realised that this new demographic represented their next crop of victims, or “voters” in the technical parlance, hence they pandered to the whims and demands of these benighted individuals. Even those bastions of intellectual rigour, scientific endeavour, and the arbiters of fundamental morality – the universities – followed suite.
By the time anyone in any sort of position of power realised what had happened, it was too late. The alphabet soup of rapidly fluctuating genders and proclivities was established as the new religion, and every new cause – however ill considered – was hoisted up the flagpole. Those who failed to genuflect their obeisance were rapidly sacrificed on the altar of wokism.
All traditional values were discarded in the haste to bring this opiate of madness to the masses by the metaphoric sword. Elders were no longer worth respecting, family was discarded in favour of strings of meaningless verbiage, diligence was replaced with individual entitlement, ethics and morality in favour of intersectionality and critical race theory. All of this was accompanied by shrewish baying against anyone who resisted swallowing their vapid and intellectually moribund soundbites – wokeness was conquering by meme and tweet.
This culminated in the heads of three of the finest educational establishments in the United States unabashedly proclaiming that, provided the correct context was employed, calling for genocide was essentially fine.
This inexorable slide into ignominy and mass-delusion proved to be a gold mine for Iran. Intent on derailing the Abraham Accords with Saudi Arabia, they stoked Hamas into a rage of brutal barbarism whilst preparing the West for an onslaught of woke-driven, malevolent propaganda.
Iran has poured millions into lubricating these reprehensible rallies. Fortunately for them, the pliant sheeple soused with wokism were ripe for plucking, and in no time at all they were chanting genocidal mantras and parading posters that would not have been out of place in Nazi Germany.
Hundreds of thousands of people throughout the world have attended pro-Palestinian protests. The plight of Gazans has attracted more attention in three months that the 600,000 civilian deaths in Syria managed to garner in a decade. A slew of far more worthy causes including the Yazidis, Uyghurs and Christians in Nigeria have had at best a limp response, and the case most obviously endowed with moral clarity – Ukraine – has had, over the near two years duration of the war, fewer protestors in total than the past few months of Palestinian protests.
With this sort of funding, the Jew-hating crowds are not going to desist easily. As pawns on Iran’s chessboard, they will persist even as they approach the equilibrium of annoyance. No matter how inconvenient or even outright infuriating they become, with Iran subsidising these protests they will continue to demand the destruction of Israel, a mere step away from calling for the death of all Jews.
Worse yet, many if not the majority of participants have absolutely no knowledge of the reality on the ground. They cannot name either the river or sea they are chanting for, let alone place them on a map. Having been fed a steady diet of outrageous fabrications which they swallow hook line and sinker, they believe that Israel is the aggressor in this war and dismiss any evidence presented as lies and propaganda. The “me too” crowd have thrown their lot in with these mindless gorms and are glaringly silent in the face of brutal Hamas rapes.
Their narrative is aided and abetted by the indefensible behaviour of the UN and other internationally recognised institutions. The Red Cross has abrogated its founding charter by failing to secure visitation to the hostages or aiding the displaced Israeli citizens. Amnesty International has lived up to its Jew-hating reputation, taking a consistent stance against Israel, despite the country being the victim of the brutal and thuggish Hamas aggression. Major public figures, ranging from UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres to actress Angelina Jolie, have publicly vilified Israel for doing what any sane country would in defence of its borders and citizens. They have all become pawns in Iran’s covert war against the Abraham Accords and Israel.
Whilst individual celebrities might not be funded directly or even indirectly by Iran, they can feel the direction the wind is blowing in, and as worshippers of the wokist faith, if only in deed rather than creed, they have no choice but to mouth the catechisms of their newly adopted religion.
Mainstream media have been corralled into feeding the seething morass by essentially spouting Hamas talking points. The doyen of journalism, the august establishment of the BBC, has a fact-checking unit that persisted in blaming Israel for the PIJ own-goal at the Al-Ahli hospital and until this day barely acknowledges that the narrative might have some flaws, yet any retraction at this point would have its utility obviated by the tardiness. After all, moments after the missile killed some 49 people, the BBC reported that it was an Israeli strike with “probably five bombs” having been dropped. Their peddling of outrageous half-truths and outright lies has hardly affected the pervasive influence they wield, since there appears to be a bottomless demand for anything and everything besmirching Israel – the actual facts having little effect on deterring the fabrications and canards.
Expecting Western governments to stand by Israel in her hour of need is beginning to resemble a movie set; all glitter and no substance. They are crumbling in the face of militant social-media driven Islamism, with the baying of the “useful idiots” overcoming whatever resistance politicians might have to demonising a beleaguered democracy. Facts and evidence have been discarded in favour of shrill calls for destruction and justice is being flayed to death in the highest courts of humanity.
Given this dire state of affairs, one could be forgiven for throwing in the towel and calling it a day. All attempts at reasoning with the opposition in the West has been met with failure. British readers will be familiar with the “Marmite effect”, being a condiment that evokes either loathing or craving, with nothing in between. The Israel-Gaza war is subject to the identical manipulation of emotion – there is no middle ground. Under these circumstances it would appear that there is no credible possibility of making a case for Israel.
Despite such a bleak outlook, there is yet hay to be made.
History reminds us that sometimes a powerful voice can have a ripple effect that disperses well beyond its expected reach. Outside of France, Émile Zola is hardly remembered for L'Assommoir or Thérèse Raquin, but his name will be forever synonymous with coining a phrase in what has become one of the best-known newspaper articles in the world, that has made its way into common parlance: “J'Accuse...!” This single article proved to be a pivotal exposé of the Dreyfuss affair.
Israel – and by extension Jews worldwide – are not entirely bereft of vocal supporters. Even in one of the finest bastions of rabid Jew-hatred, the European Union, there are beacons of light such as Assita Kanko, a brave and strident defender of Jews and Israel, and Geert Wilders, a staunch and vocal supporter for decades. Stellar media figures including the likes of Douglas Murray, Mosab Hassan Yousef, Briggite Gabriel, John Spencer and Col. Richard Kemp have been staunch supporters, making reasoned, factual and evidence-based arguments. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Nate Buzolic, entering stage right as thespians, have shown great sympathy and undertook advocacy for the cause. The list is not short and spans the globe.
These individuals require far more backing and promotion than they have received so far. Rather than be snowed under by the vituperative bile rained down by social and traditional media, these very same people can be supported to provide a staunchly positive and high-profile narrative.
To what purpose, one might ask? Certainly not to attempt to convert the indoctrinated – that’s a quixotic aspiration at best; rather, to encourage the millions of silent supporters who do not participate on social media to reverse their hesitancy or apathy and engage with like-minded supporters of Jews and Israel.
The few non-Jews who have undertaken a herculean and brave task to post support regularly on X and other social media platforms have a limited pool of potential followers from within the tribe; encouraging engagement from outside the small Jewish online demographic would provide the core producers with far more exposure, traction and visibility, all of which increase the impact and value of the content they create. Pro-Israel media content created by non-Jews has more emotive impact than that created by Jews, for obvious reasons.
Lastly, supporting non-Jews by providing them with “likes” and subscriptions comes under the heading of that quintessential Jewish value of “Hakarat hatov” – the recognition of good. Many of the non-Jews supporting Israel have no skin in the game; they are purely altruistic in this matter, therefore any growth in their profiles that we as a nation can provide them is simply an expression of what we ought to hold dear, inasmuch as it serves our purposes.
PS retweeted
Judge Cannon just did the unthinkable: She dismissed the Trump classified documents case on the repeatedly rejected basis that DOJ violated the Constitution’s Appointments Clause by appointing Special Counsel Smith at all! DOJ must appeal right away. On SCOTUS, only Justice Thomas took that view in Trump v. United States. This finally gives Jack Smith an opportunity to seek her removal from the case. I think the case for doing so is very strong.
PS retweeted
In this thread, I’m going to go into some detail about what the phrase “From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be Free” means to many Jewish people. You may not agree, but I hope that it may enlighten those who simply don't understand the almost visceral reaction to it.
🧵
PS retweeted
How far back should we go?
1. Before Israel, there was a British mandate, not a Palestinian state
2. Before the British Mandate, there was the Ottoman Empire, not a Palestinian state.
3. Before the Ottoman Empire, there was the Islamic state of the Mamluks of Egypt, not a Palestinian state. 4. Before the Islamic state of the Mamluks of Egypt, there was the Ayyubid Arab-Kurdish Empire, not a Palestinian state.
5. Before the Ayyubid Empire, there was the Frankish and Christian Kingdom of Jerusalem, not a Palestinian state.
6. Before the Kingdom of Jerusalem, there was the Umayyad and Fatimid empires, not a Palestinian state. 7. Before the Umayyad and Fatimid empires, there was the Byzantine empire, not a Palestinian state.
8. Before the Byzantine Empire, there were the Sassanids, not a Palestinian state.
9. Before the Sassanid Empire, there was the Byzantine Empire, not a Palestinian state.
10. Before the Byzantine Empire, there was the Roman Empire, not a Palestinian state.
11. Before the Roman Empire, there was the Hasmonean state, not a Palestinian state.
12. Before the Hasmonean state, there was the Seleucid, not a Palestinian state.
13. Before the Seleucid empire, there was the empire of Alexander the Great, not a Palestinian state.
14. Before the empire of Alexander the Great, there was the Persian empire, not a Palestinian state.
15. Before the Persian Empire, there was the Babylonian Empire, not a Palestinian state.
16. Before the Babylonian Empire, there were the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah, not a Palestinian state. 17. Before the Kingdoms of Israel and Judah, there was the Kingdom of Israel, not a Palestinian state.
18. Before the kingdom of Israel, there was the theocracy of the twelve tribes of Israel, not a Palestinian state.
19. Before the theocracy of the twelve tribes of Israel, there was an agglomeration of independent Canaanite city-kingdoms, not a Palestinian state.
PS retweeted
‼️ THIS!
The methods used by Russian propaganda described by a Russian journalist:
“I studied at the Faculty of Journalism of Moscow State University. We had a military department. In an atmosphere of secrecy, we were taught special combat propaganda - the art of sowing discord in the ranks of the enemy with the help of disinformation and manipulation of consciousness.
Let me tell you, it’s a scary business. I'm not kidding.
Combat, or “black,” propaganda allows any distortion of real facts to solve propaganda problems. This is an effective weapon used for the sole purpose of knocking out the enemy’s brains.
The "rotten herring" method. The "inverted pyramid" method. The "big lie" method. The “40 to 60” principle. The "absolutely obvious" method.
You also know all these methods and techniques. You just don't realize it. As intended.
We were taught to use special propaganda techniques against soldiers of the enemy army. Today they are used against the civilian population of our own country.
For two years now, reading Russian newspapers or watching television shows, I have noted with interest that people coordinating the distribution and interpretation of news in Russia clearly learned from the same textbook as I have, from the same cheerful colonel or his colleagues.
For example, the “rotten herring” method. It works like this. A false accusation is chosen. It is important that it is as dirty and scandalous as possible. For example, petty theft, child molestation, or murder, preferably out of greed work well.
The purpose of the “rotten herring” is not to prove the accusation. It’s to cause a wide, public discussion... How it’s unjust and unfair.
The human psyche is arranged in such a way that, as soon as the accusation becomes the subject of public discussion, its “supporters” and “opponents”, “experts”, rabid “prosecutors” and ardent “defenders” of the accused inevitably arise.
But regardless of their views, all participants in the discussion again and again pronounce the name of the accused in connection with a dirty and scandalous accusation, thus rubbing more and more “rotten herring” into his “clothes”, until finally the “smell” begins to follow him everywhere. The question “killed-stole-seduced or not” becomes the main one when his name is mentioned.
Or, for example, the “40 to 60” method invented by Goebbels. It consists in creating media that give 60 percent of their information in the interests of the enemy. On the other hand, having earned his trust in this way, the remaining 40 percent are used for extremely effective, thanks to this trust, disinformation.
During World War II, there was a radio station that the anti-fascist world listened to. It was thought to be British. Only after the war did it turn out that it was actually Goebbels’ radio station, which worked on the “40 to 60” principle he developed.
The “big lie” method is very effective It is a bit like the “rotten herring” method, but actually works differently. Its essence is to offer the audience such a universal and terrible lie with the highest degree of confidence that it is almost impossible to believe that it's possible to lie about such a thing.
The trick here is that a properly composed and well-invented ‘big lie’ causes such a deep emotional trauma in the listener or viewer that it then determines his views for a long time, contrary to any arguments of logic and reason.
False descriptions of cruel abuse of children or women work particularly well.
Let’s say that the message about a crucified child due to the deep emotional trauma it causes will determine the views of the person who received this information for a long time, no matter how much someone tries to convince him later, using logical arguments.
But our cheerful colonel especially revered the method of “absolute evidence”, which delivers, although not fast, but reliable results.”
Continued below 🔽
































