1. The real catatrophe that occured when the Arabs failed to wipe out the Jewish state.
2. The mythical narrative that they remember on Nakba Day 2/13
They build their story on several pillars:
That the Palestinians welcomed the Jews
The Palestinians were innocent victims
The Jews planned to expel them
It was a one-sided slaughter
The demographic weakness of the Jews
The Arab armies had to save the Palestinians 3/13
And we can therefore prove that Nakba Day is based on nothing more than fiction - because each and every one is a lie. 4/13
The Jews were welcomed by the Arabs is an easy myth to dispel. The Arabs violently opposed the Jews arriving. There were riots and attacks and massacres - such as these examples from 1929 and 1938
Which means the founding pillar is a lie 5/13
Innocent? They rejected the partition and within hours of the partition Jews were attacked. 10,000s of irregular forces invaded as early as January 1948 - and there were massacres of Jews throughout the land. Such as this one in Feb 1948.
They were not innnocent victims. 6/13
Pre-plan? This one is wrapped up in antisemitic ideas of Jewish power. The Jews couldn't pre-plan anything and for a while they thought they might lose. An intelligence report from the British in April has it the other way around - with the Arabs trying to get the Jews out. 7/13
The myth of a one sided slaughter is easy to dispel too. This nugget from the British archives shows that just a few weeks before the Arabs invaded - there were equal casualties on both sides. It was a bloody civil conflict. 8/13
The myth of the demographic threat (the motive for expulsion) is just them clutching at straws.
The Jews did not have a number problem. 100,000s of Jews were still stuck in Europe - just waiting for the doors of Israel to open. Israel's population doubled - quickly. 9/13
The Arab states didn't need to invade anything. The Arabs could have accepted Partition, nobody would have got hurt - and the Palestinians would have had their state. The Arabs had long been promising they would invaded- just to destroy anything the Jews built. 10/13
Which means all of the pillars that the Nakba Day is built on are lies. They are pushing myths.
Their narrative is nothing but deception and antisemitic propaganda. 11/13
worse still - the myth has become like a religion. They say that to question it is as bad as Holocaust denial.
This belittles the industrial genocide of the Jews - inverts the Holocaust by implying the Jews act like Nazis and equates the Holocaust with a Palestinian myth. 12/13
In short - the Arabs wanted the conflict - they started the conflict - and they lost - badly. Their 'Nakba' is their failure to wipe out the Jews. 13/13
Exclusive: Al Jazeera terror operatives pose as journalists, and global media outlets help to sanctify these dangerous jihadists as heroes.
Thread
🧵⬇️⬇️⬇️
Journalism isn’t a suicide pact. In Gaza, too many press jackets are being used to launder terror as 'news.' The truly scary part is how people who openly support Jihad are being sanctified by our legacy media - and turned into heroes.
Take the Israeli strike last week that took out the Hamas terrorist Anas Al-Sharif. The IDF had presented evidence he was on the Hamas payroll. The fact he wore a PRESS jacket makes his actions worse. He probably scares innocent Gazans around him. What is there to like?
Rinse and Repeat: Another Gaza Famine Lie Goes Viral
1/16
🧵Thread ⬇️⬇️⬇️
On 23 July, the world saw the tragic image of Muhammad al-Mutawaq. Headlines said he was being starved in a Gaza famine. I checked. It was false. He had cerebral palsy. His siblings were healthy. A viral media lie - and even @nytimes had to step backwards. 2/16
Barely a week later, the same trick was played again.
This time with a little girl: Maryam.
We were told she was proof of Gaza’s “catastrophic hunger crisis.”
This is not the face of famine. It is the face of a medically vulnerable child whose tragic situation was hijacked and weaponised.
Exposing the truth behind the viral Gaza 'famine' image of Mohammed Al-Matouq. 1/13
🧵⬇️⬇️⬇️
You’ve seen the photo. A starving Gazan child. Bones showing. Headline after headline claiming it was proof of famine.
It ran on the front page of the Daily Express on 23 July. Then Sky News, CNN, NYT, BBC, Guardian, and others picked it up.
But they left something out. 2/13
Let me just start with other images the media chose not to use. Photographs of Mohammed with his 3-year-old brother Joud. Both mother and brother are healthy and fed.
Any honest journalist should have immediately questioned – and reported - what we were actually seeing. 3/13
BBC really cannot help itself.
@bbcnews really is a puppet for Hamas - a radical Islamic terror group.
You want proof? Just look at the BBC's headline right now:
Thread 🧵⬇️⬇️⬇️
The BBC is running a headline on its front page. It claims '21 children have died from malnutrition in the last 72 hours':
Inside the 'live' page, it is clear that the news comes from a single source - Dr Mohammed Abu Salmiya - the director of Shifa Hospital. He is the one who told the BBC that 900,000 children in Gaza are suffering from hunger, 70,000 of them in a state of malnutrition.
Seen the latest 'massacre at aid site' headlines? They are the result of a vicious and deliberate demonisation of Israel pantomime in Gaza directed by Hamas - that is happening every day.
Thread:
⬇️⬇️⬇️
First, setting the scene. Since October 7 Israel has been fighting in Gaza to rescue hostages and to break Hamas's grip on power. A key part of this has been separating Hamas from aid distribution - which is why US contractors have been brought in to manage aid sites.
Hamas needs to control aid - so making the aid effort fail is in its direct interest. NGOs infiltrated by Hamas and other terrorist groups have aligned themselves with this goal. Their objective isn't feeding Palestinians - it's ensuring the aid program is seen to fail.
The Peter Johnston review into @bbcnews Hamas documentary scandal isn’t just damage control -
it is an outrageous whitewash - a scandal in its own right.
I have just published a response. 1/13
Thread 🧵⬇️⬇️⬇️
Hidden in footnote 38! A production team member admitted they hid the Hamas affiliation because it would ‘scare' the BBC. The BBC's review dismisses this as irrelevant, relying on 'good faith'.
This assumption of innocence - despite evidence - is institutional naivety. 2/13
The father of the narrator was a senior Hamas official. Yet the BBC claims this had no influence.
The boy went home to his Hamas father every night for months while filming took place. To suggest this dynamic had no influence at all defies all common sense. 3/13