Useful Idiots

 https://x.com/antspeaks/status/1975161508725186891?s=51&t=cLq01Oy84YkmYPZ-URIMYw

If you know, you know.   You'll have to click on the link to see the embedded video.  

" Here's a very uncomfortable truth. You think there is a genocide in Gaza because that is exactly what you have been told to think.

The greatest achievement of radical Islamists in recent decades has been how they have managed to expose the gullibility of the masses worldwide, most notably in the West. They have proven that the vast majority of people, even in this day and age, still subscribe to a sort of hive mind mentality. In times when you would think humans are smarter than ever before due to the means we have to access information, the opposite seems true.

This is not entirely new. For thousands of years, humans have been manipulated through groupthink, propaganda, and emotional appeals, from rulers and religious leaders to revolutionary movements. The tools and platforms may have changed, but the mechanism remains the same: exploit trust, exploit empathy, and shape perception before reason has a chance to intervene. What these radical Islamists demonstrated, more specifically the terrorist group Hamas, is simply the modern, digital-age version of an age-old tactic, amplified globally through social media and 24-hour news cycles.

So how do we know that Hamas engaged in this manipulation? Hamas itself admitted in its official post-7 October report, "Our Narrative... Operation Al-Aqsa Flood," that the attacks were designed to advance a deliberate propaganda campaign portraying Israel as committing "genocide" in Gaza. This framed Israeli responses as the real atrocity to counter the horrors of the 7 October attack, which ironically fits the actual definition of genocide far better. The goal was to sway gullible Western audiences. Senior Hamas official Ghazi Hamad even boasted that this narrative successfully shifted global perceptions, leading to recognition of a Palestinian state. In short, they engineered the "genocide" smear to weaponise sympathy and justify their terror. The strategy worked precisely because it preyed on ignorance, emotional bias, and the eagerness of many in the West to accept simple narratives over inconvenient truths.

Hamas leader Ghazi Hamad: “We will repeat October 7-like massacres until Israel is annihilated.”

 

 

The "genocide" narrative exploded into the mainstream within days of Israel’s response to the 7 October attack. It, of course, began in the United States, as it often does with issues of this nature. It then trickles down to Western European nations and eventually the rest of Europe and the world. This is a pattern that can be observed with almost any major “outrage” of the past few years, whether it was the trans rights debate or the Black Lives Matter movement. It all follows the same template. When “pronouns” and gender identity ideology first became trendy in the West, gaining traction in the US and the UK, these concepts were barely discussed in other parts of Europe. Having travelled extensively during that period, it was remarkable to see how these ideologies were adopted elsewhere with a significant delay, almost as if the rest of the continent were simply following the lead of American and British cultural trends.

And that is what the whole "genocide" narrative has become. It is nothing but a trend pushed by radical Islamists in order to cause division globally. How were they so successful at it? Well, that is actually easily explained. Mainstream media and the gullibility of the masses are just one aspect, but there is another factor of extreme significance: the funding that universities across the West have received from the nation of Qatar. The same nation that, while it claims to be an ally of the West, is also known for harbouring known terrorists, including the leaders of Hamas. Between 2001 and 2021, Qatar donated at least $4.7 billion to various academic institutions across the United States. In 2023 alone, Qatar's donations to U.S. universities amounted to nearly $1.5 billion, the highest single-year total on record. Major recipients include Cornell University, which received over $2.3 billion, and Texas A&M University, which received approximately $1.01 billion. Additionally, Qatar has invested in U.K. higher education, including the digitisation of parts of the British Library. Should it really come as a surprise then that some of the loudest voices screaming "genocide" and in many cases showing full support for Islamist terrorist groups are university students? Again, it is a pattern that simply cannot be denied, and it is shocking to see just how effectively this indoctrination has worked, thanks to billions being injected into the education systems.

 

 

 

 

But of course, for many this will not mean much at all, because a popular way they will counter it is to say, "Well, I have seen the destruction for myself" and therefore it must be a "genocide."

Destruction like this, right?:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Well, no. Because this is not Gaza. This is Afghanistan during its war with the U.S. in the early 2000s. We live in times where we have a generation of young people who were far too young to remember those events, and for whom the war in Gaza is the first time they have seen such heavy reporting on a conflict. The novelty of this conflict for many younger people contributes to the hyper-focus and skewed perceptions they develop. Society as a whole, even those old enough to remember conflicts like Afghanistan, suffers from a chronic habit of forgetting past events and fixating on new ones. This collective amnesia prevents people from using critical thinking to analyse situations properly, making it easier for disproportionate or biased narratives to take hold. The heavy reporting is, of course, entirely disproportionate and in many ways hypocritical, because there have been many other conflicts and situations that actually fit the definition of genocide far more accurately. The selective focus and framing of images serve to reinforce pre-existing narratives, making it easier to manipulate public perception.

Part of this selective perception comes from the tendency to treat certain reports as unquestionable truth. People often treat the “ultimate gotcha” as pointing to Amnesty International or a UN body that has supposedly declared a genocide. These reports are frequently accepted at face value, without much critical examination. What is rarely acknowledged is that many of these findings are deeply flawed. Governments around the world often reject them, yet that fact is largely ignored. Equally overlooked is who is behind these reports. Recent UN findings, for instance, have been linked to figures whose credibility and motives are highly controversial. Some of these individuals have a history of partisan involvement, unverified claims, or clear biases, raising serious questions about the objectivity of the reports. Nevertheless, these findings are presented as authoritative, shaping public perception while avoiding proper scrutiny.

A way to clearly illustrate society’s hyper-focus on certain issues while largely ignoring others is the following:

There have been

613,000 deaths in Syria 380,000 deaths in Yemen 240,000 deaths in Afghanistan 500,000 deaths in Sudan 300,000 deaths in Iraq 62,000 deaths in Nigeria

All of these deaths were caused by radical Islamist groups, whether in the context of civil wars or, in Nigeria’s case, the targeted slaughter of innocent Christians simply because of their faith.

None of these conflicts have received the same level of attention in mainstream media as the situation in Gaza. This selective focus has led many to conclude, expressed in the often-heard phrase “no Jews, no news,” that when Israel or Jewish people are not involved, public and media attention is far less intense.

These numbers make the point clearly, yet they reveal a pattern that is often overlooked and, for many, uncomfortable to confront due to fears of being labelled racist or otherwise prejudiced. They also illustrate, in my view and justifiably, why many see antisemitism as underlying much of this selective attention. At its core, this reflects a widespread reluctance to be honest with oneself and a failure to apply critical thinking when assessing complex situations.

In the end, this is not just about the manipulation of a single narrative, but about the many ways perception can be shaped and distorted. One of the greatest obstacles in overcoming this is human nature itself. People are inherently resistant to admitting they were wrong or that they were duped, and the idea of acknowledging one’s own gullibility is deeply uncomfortable. Generational inexperience, selective reporting, financial influence, and the tendency to fixate on the new while forgetting the past all combine to reinforce skewed perceptions. Understanding this does not diminish the real suffering in Gaza, but it does require a willingness to step back, think critically, and confront inconvenient truths. Without that honesty and self-reflection, even the clearest evidence and most reasoned arguments risk being ignored."