Take a hard look at the mass media landscape. For decades, major conglomerates -- think Disney, Warner Bros., CBS, and others -- have been disproportionately owned and led by Jewish executives. This isn’t conspiracy nonsense; it’s just cold, hard data from annual reports and corporate histories. These outlets shape global narratives, decide what’s news, and what’s buried. Now, ask yourself: where’s the widespread Jewish outcry against the often deceptive practices of these giants? Where are the mass protests from Jewish communities against the spin, the omissions, the outright fabrications peddled by these entities? Crickets. If there’s no pushback, isn’t it reasonable to infer at least tacit approval of the distortion when it aligns with certain agendas?
Nowhere is this more glaring than in the Israel-Palestine coverage. Media bias here isn’t just a ‘whoopsie’ -- it’s systemic. Outlets with heavy Jewish influence have consistently framed Israel as the eternal victim, downplaying or outright ignoring the brutal realities of occupation, settlement expansion, and Palestinian suffering. Stats don’t lie: a 2018 study of the Associated Press found that Israeli deaths were reported on at a rate of nearly four times greater than on Palestinian deaths (see: https://israelpalestinenews.org/associa ... reporting/). Earlier studies found similar or even larger distortion. Yet, again, where’s the Jewish-led backlash against this skewed reporting? The silence isn’t just deafening -- it’s damning. It suggests a communal willingness to let the narrative slide when it protects the image of a Jewish homeland.
The issue here is a pattern of Jewish behavior that emerges when collective interests are at stake. History gives us additional parallels: during the early 20th century, Jewish networks in finance and politics often moved in lockstep to secure influence in host nations, from the Balfour Declaration to lobbying efforts in the U.S. Congress and more. Here's another example:
The point is that Jewish initiatives can and do include strategic, well-organized deception whenever the stakes are high. And if this group can rally to shape policy or public perception, why wouldn’t they also rally to control a story?Jewish journalist Philip Weiss’ perception of this hypocritical double standard by Jewish organizations - i.e., non-Jews are anti-Semites for pointing out Jewish clannishness while Jews in fact celebrate their allegiance to each other - was stated this way:
“When the Anti-Defamation League surveys the goyim , one of the questions it asks is whether they think Jews stick together. If they say yes, that’s evidence of anti-Semitic attitudes. [The ADL’s] urging Jews to stick together on one hand while at the same time blasting the world for believing that we stick together: I don’t think you can really have it both ways, but that’s the outsider box Jews have helped construct for themselves.” [WEISS, p. 29]
p. 728,
https://archive.org/details/WhenVictims ... eInAmerica
Looping back to 'Holocaust' narratives, why the shock at the idea of coordinated testimony or exaggeration? If media silence and bias can be tolerated -- or even encouraged -- by a community for modern geopolitical gain, then historical narratives aren’t some sacred cow immune to manipulation. 'Survivor' accounts, often laced with inconsistencies when scrutinized (far too many examples to list), aren’t above question just because they’re emotionally charged. The capacity for collective deception exists; ignoring it is willful blindness and puts everyone in danger.
---
Red executives are Jewish (Jews are just ~2% of the US population, ~0.2% globally):
- jewish-med.jpg (346.66 KiB) Viewed 804 times
