Zionism

How to deal with Bondi (not the pedophile protector one)

by damagecollateral
They’ll scream at us, and we’ll scream back louder than ever

(This article applies whether the Bondi Beach attack was a psy-op or not)

Let’s be clear about what happened yesterday at Bondi Beach. It was a massacre, a gruesome spectacle of violence that the media will feast on for days. But if you think this was some unforeseeable tragedy, a bolt of lightning from a clear blue sky, you haven’t been paying attention. You’ve been swallowing the official narrative like a free lunch.

Just as the October 7th attack was the grim, predictable outcome of decades of Israeli sadism, ethnic cleansing, and a supremacist ideology that views non-Jews as subhuman, the attack at Bondi was inevitable. It was baked into the cake. You can’t stomp on a people’s face for 75 years, bomb their children into oblivion, starve them, and humiliate them on a daily basis without expecting some of that rage to eventually blow back in horrific, unpredictable ways. And make no mistake, there will be more, and Zionists are praying hard, if not orchestrating, for it. This is not an anomaly; it is the new normal, the logical consequence of a policy of endless, unpunished aggression.

And the response? It’s a script we know by heart. The Israeli propaganda machine, already greased and ready to go, will kick into high gear. Its proxies in Western media and politics will wail about a “new wave of terror,” using the bloodshed to justify their own brutality and paint anyone who dares to question the official narrative as a sympathizer. They will weaponize this tragedy just as they have weaponized every other, to deflect from the genocide they are actively perpetrating.

The last thing any of us should do right now is fall for this. The last thing we should do is let this event distract us, or worse, make us shrink. That is precisely what the Zionists want. They want you to look at the bloody sand in Australia and forget the bloody rubble in Gaza. They want you to be so overwhelmed by their pain that you no longer have the energy to fight for justice for their victims.

So what do we do? We use Bondi to double down. We get louder.

This is the moment to up the ante on exposing Israeli atrocities, both the current live-streamed genocide and the historical record of dispossession and terror that founded the state. We must constantly, relentlessly remind everyone that attacks like Bondi are not the cause of the problem, but a symptom. The focus must shift from the pathetic, predictable chorus of “what a terrible event” to the cold, hard truth: “We told you this would happen if you didn’t change your ways.” This is not about condoning violence; it’s about explaining its origins. It’s about stating, unequivocally, that the blood of these victims is also on the hands of the politicians and ideologues who created the conditions for this to happen.

And we must hammer home the point that anti-Zionism is not antisemitism. This is not a nuance; it is the central battlefield. We need to weave this message into every march, every talk, every social media post. Zionism is a political ideology, a violent, colonial project, and it is no more synonymous with Judaism than fascism is with Italianism. To equate the two is a deliberate, cynical smear tactic designed to shut down all debate.

Furthermore, and just as importantly, we must turn this moment into an opportunity for real talk about value. Ten people die at Bondi, and the world stops. Governments issue solemn statements, flags fly at half-mast, and the media dedicates 24/7 coverage. Tens of thousands of Palestinians are systematically exterminated in Gaza, a genocide funded and armed by the West, and it’s a “complex conflict.” It’s a “tragedy” with “two sides.” To give these ten lives more weight, more outrage, more political capital than the tens of thousands of lives snuffed out by Israeli bombs when they are literally a blip in the totality of carnage is not just biased; it is an act of profound, seething racism. It is the clearest demonstration imaginable of whose life the world deems valuable and whose it deems disposable.

So no, this is not the time to be intimidated. It is not the time to cower in fear of government crackdowns or online mobs. We don’t need to defend ourselves or apologize for what we stand for. The truth is a defense in itself. We already have the majority of the public on our side of the fundamental question: the slaughter in Gaza must stop. Our job is to connect that sentiment to its root cause.

Slowing down now will send the wrong message to Zionists. It will teach them that crimes like Bondi work. It will incentivize them to work with the MI6 and all the other happy-to-oblige intel agencies to commit more. That’s why doubling down on the pro-Palestine message is necessary to prevent future crimes, to save lives!

This is the time to scream from the rooftops how utterly racist it is that the death of a handful of Westerners warrants global action while the industrial-scale slaughter of Palestinians earns a shrug. This is the time to declare, loudly and without apology, that the only path to peace, for Palestinians and for Jews alike, is for the West to finally pull the plug on the rotten, corrupt, and murderous Zionist project. And it is the time to say the one thing they desperately don’t want you to believe: No Jew will ever be truly safe so long as the ideology of Zionism, which conflates Jewish identity with a violent, colonial state, continues to exist. Their project is a death trap, and this is not the time to stop saying so.

So to summarize, our messaging should include the following points:

1- Spare us the crying and focus on the root of the problem. If you won’t, we will.

2- Anyone who’s calling for a dramatic uptick in suppression of pro-Palestine speech while not calling for stopping weapons and intelligence assistance to Israel is not only pro-fascist, but is deeply, brazenly hateful and supremacist toward Arabs, Muslims, and especially Palestinians.

3- In order to prevent future attacks like Bondi and save lives, it is ever more prudent to work on ending Zionism now.

4- Anti-Zionism is not antisemitism and never was. Thousands of Jews, holocaust scholars, and holocaust survivors agree.

The Zionist Playbook: What 300 Million Silenced Arabs Can Teach Us About Where This Is Heading

by damagecollateral

Egyptian political prisons are looking more and more like they’d be right at home in America

There’s a pattern emerging in how pro-Israel advocates are responding to dissent in America, and it doesn’t involve winning hearts and minds. University presidents were sacked. Students were expelled. Professors were fired. Deportations for speech. Local governments are passing increasingly draconian anti-BDS resolutions. And the people behind these efforts aren’t exactly being subtle about it.

What’s striking isn’t just the heavy-handedness—it’s the openness. Major donors discuss their leverage over universities in newspaper interviews. Lobby groups openly strategize about buying media companies and increasing “control” over government policy. They’re not hiding the ball. In fact, they’re so brazen about deploying wealth and political muscle that they’re inadvertently reinforcing some of the oldest and ugliest stereotypes about Jewish power—leading to the darkly funny speculation that maybe, just maybe, this is intentional. Create enough anxiety about antisemitism, the theory goes, and you’ve got your pretext for an even bigger crackdown.

The question is whether this strategy can actually work. Can you suppress a political movement through sheer force—financial pressure, institutional capture, legal intimidation—without ever bothering to change anyone’s mind?

For an answer, look east.

The Middle East Laboratory

Across the Arab world, roughly 300 million people live under regimes that are, to varying degrees, in the business of protecting Israel from their own populations. This isn’t conspiracy theory; it’s barely even subtext. These governments were installed with Western backing, maintained with Western support, and in many cases rely on Israeli surveillance technology and intelligence sharing to keep the lid on.

The dissidents these regimes crush—whether they’re Islamists, leftists, or just people asking for basic rights—aren’t usually being imprisoned because they’re decrying corruption. They’re being imprisoned because they see their governments for what they are: subordinate to Western interests, including the protection of Israel. And the scale of repression required to maintain this arrangement is staggering. Hundreds of thousands killed, disappeared, imprisoned, exiled. Families destroyed. Entire generations of opposition ground into dust.

These movements didn’t go quietly. In fact, many fought hard—which only gave their autocrats the excuse to crack down harder. Eventually, after enough bullets and prison cells, they learned: you go silent, or you disappear.

The result? Walk through Cairo, Amman, Riyadh. Notice something missing? Street protests for Gaza are nearly nonexistent. Not because Arabs don’t care—they’re overwhelmingly anti-Zionist—but because they’d be shot for it. Meanwhile, their governments are quietly helping Israel, financially and militarily, and there’s nothing their populations can do about it.

This doesn’t work forever. Oppression breeds resentment, and eventually, revolt. But here’s the thing: that’s actually fine with the people running this system. The West has gotten very good at subverting revolts. See: Arab Spring, results of.

The Lesson: Repression Works (For a While)

What we might not fully appreciate, sitting in our relatively comfortable American context, is that while brutal repression doesn’t change minds, it absolutely stops open dissent. We’re already seeing it on college campuses. A few expulsions, some disciplinary actions, and suddenly the encampments are gone. The protests have quieted. Students have learned what happens when you stick your neck out.

So imagine if the government went further. Not just expulsions—actual criminal penalties. Not just penalties—actual violence. History suggests that killing a few dissidents sends a very effective chill through a movement.

And here’s where the Middle East comparison gets uncomfortable: if we don’t stop this trajectory now, there’s no natural endpoint. Learning from Muslim-majority countries, Zionist-driven authoritarianism doesn’t stop at “a little bit of censorship.” It stops nowhere.

Presidents for life? Sure. Constitutional rewrites to consolidate power? Ask Egypt how that goes. Thousands disappeared into political prisons? Standard operating procedure in the region. And lest you think this is hyperbole, consider that Jonathan Pollard—the convicted Israeli spy—recently mused about using nuclear weapons if necessary. These people are not shy about their willingness to step on your neck and make you comply, whether you like it or not.

“But We Have Guns”

Some will say this can’t happen here because Americans are armed. The Second Amendment, the militias, the culture of resistance—surely that’s a firewall against tyranny.

I don’t buy it. Individual firearms and loosely organized militias don’t stop a determined government with modern surveillance, legal machinery, and overwhelming force. They just don’t. The fantasy of armed resistance collapses the moment you’re up against a state apparatus that’s willing to use its full weight.

The Long Game

So where does this leave us?

First, don’t assume it can’t get worse. It can get much, much worse. The people driving this have shown us, through their actions across the Middle East, exactly how far they’re willing to go.

Second, if you want to stop it, you need to start now. And you need to plan for a long, grinding fight. This isn’t going away because you posted the right thread or attended the right protest. It’s going away because enough people commit to tireless, persistent resistance over years and decades.

The alternative is learning the lesson that 300 million Arabs have already learned: when you’re up against people with enough money, enough political influence, and enough shamelessness to say the quiet part loud, silence becomes survival.

And they’re counting on you choosing silence.

The Great Credulity Shift: How Israel Lost the Information War

by damagecollateral

A funny thing happened on the way to another mass grave

The Israelis just dumped another load of Palestinian bodies into Gaza—bodies bearing what I can hear Western media outlets delicately calling “signs of mistreatment,” which in non-euphemistic English means torture marks and bullet holes in the back of the head. This isn’t exactly a new phenomenon. Why do Israelis publicize their crimes like this, you ask? To scare Palestinians and neighboring Arabs. As for the risk of upsetting Western audiences, well, Israelis think they simply won’t believe it.

That’s right. For decades, Israel has operated on a simple principle: commit atrocities so outlandish that Western audiences literally can’t process them. Evacuating entire cities like Yaffa and Haifa? Poisoning water supplies with typhus in Akko and Lyddia? It sounds like the fever dream of a conspiracy theorist, especially when it’s being reported by brown people with accents who pray five times a day. Surely it must be more complicated than simple ethnic cleansing, right? There must be context we’re missing. Both sides, you know.

This was the formula, and it was bulletproof. The sheer audacity of the crimes, combined with good old-fashioned Western racism and the assumption that Palestinians were inherently unreliable narrators, created a perfect shield. The reports were too crazy to believe, and the reporters were too foreign to trust. And our Zionist-controlled, government-subservient media is right there to discredit Palestinians at every turn.

But something broke.

The Gaza genocide—let’s be honest and call it what South Africa called it at The Hague—changed the equation. Seventeen months of high-definition horror, posted in real-time by Palestinians themselves, fundamentally altered the credibility calculation in the Western mind. People started believing Palestinians. Worse, from Israel’s perspective, they started going back through the archive, re-evaluating decades of Palestinian testimony with fresh eyes. The Nakba? Maybe that actually happened the way they said it did. Deir Yassin? Jenin? The prisoner abuse? All of it suddenly crackling with an electric charge of plausibility it never had before.

Even better: the credibility transfer went both ways. The same audiences who stopped reflexively doubting Palestinians started reflexively doubting Israelis. Why exactly should we assume Mustafa Barghouti is biased but take Mark Levin at face value? Why are Palestinian casualty figures “claims” while Israeli statements are just… reported? Why does the Muslim guy in the keffiyeh need three sources while the IDF spokesman with the better PowerPoint gets printed verbatim?

The Israelis don’t seem to understand this shift has happened. They’re still playing by the old rules, broadcasting their brutality to intimidate Arabs while assuming Westerners won’t believe the reports anyway. They’re advertising their crimes on the assumption that the audience will remain incredulous.

This is why you see the increasingly frantic attempts to keep this old paradigm alive. “Pallywood!” they shriek, trying to paint Palestinians as Hollywood-level fabulists. The starvation reports are exaggerated! The genocide numbers are inflated! It’s all fake! The desperation is obvious: they’re trying to claw back the credibility gap, to restore the comfortable old arrangement where Israelis were presumed truthful and Palestinians presumed lying.

It’s not going to work, and here’s why: Palestinians got good at this. Decades of having every single claim scrutinized, picked apart, and dismissed made them into obsessive documentarians. They know they’ll be doubted, so they film everything, source everything, archive everything. The result is that their reporting has become ironclad in ways that make the IDF’s increasingly preposterous explanations—she was shot by Hamas, the hospital bombed itself, the aid workers were terrorists, the journalists were combatants—sound like the propaganda they are.

Meanwhile, independent media outlets have proliferated, places willing to apply the same skepticism to both sides. These outlets aren’t bankrolled by Sheldon Adelson’s heirs or dependent on access to Israeli officials, which means they can ask uncomfortable questions. And audiences, particularly younger ones, trust them more than the legacy outlets with their suspiciously shiny production values and their weird reluctance to use the word “killing” when Israelis are doing it.

The “antisemitism” card isn’t working anymore either. People have figured out it’s a mute button, a way to end conversations rather than have them. The spell is broken.

It must be a strange relief for Palestinians, finally being believed after howling into the void for a century. But the mainstream media? They’re going to keep playing the old hits, keep soft-pedaling Israeli crimes and interrogating Palestinian testimony, because they’re locked into the worldview of their donors and their access-based business model. They’re too compromised to adapt, which means they’ll be left behind, still insisting we can’t really know what happened while everyone else watches the videos.

The great credulity shift is complete. The Israelis are still acting like it’s 1982. The world has moved on.

“`