Zionist Rage on X Crumbles Under Truth

Social media’s many faces, and all the good it creates, harbours an existence for the ignorant. Opening the world’s eyes to the actualities of Zionism and Israel’s sovereign theft of the Palestinian people’s homeland and its evil treachery of decades of oppression and slaughter is a case in point.  

Yesterday ‘X’ demonstrated why social media serves as digital battlegrounds where ideologies clash, truths obscured, and propaganda is often paraded as fact.

My engagement with a post about the heinous crimes of BBC zoologist, Adam Britton, convicted for unspeakable acts of animal cruelty, highlighted this reality in stark detail. What should’ve been seen as a critique of global hypocrisy—condemning the depravity of one man while ignoring the mass atrocities committed against Palestinians—unleashed a torrent of Zionist vitriol aimed at silencing dissent.

My comment was straightforward: it criticised the selective outrage of the international community, quick to condemn a cretin like Britton but largely silent or complicit in the face of the slaughter, torture, and genocide of Palestinians.

The parallels, while disturbing, underscore a glaring moral inconsistency. My simple observation triggered an onslaught of attacks, from rabid Zionists who sought to discredit, denigrate, and derail the conversation.

Their inane fury wasn’t unexpected; it’s a hallmark of online Zionist engagement. Criticise Israel for its behaviour and war crimes and you’re an anti-Semite, and yet very few who bandy the term around know very little of what a Semite is, and what it means to be anti-Semitic. I asked one person who calls himself “hyperultrapride” to explain if he knew what a Semite was. He couldn’t.

What was surprising, was the depth of ignorance and the fragility of their arguments. Armed with debunked narratives and propaganda, I was attacked with accusations, insults, and the tired tropes designed to vilify any criticism of Israel or solidarity with Palestine.

Central to their vitriol was the insistence on narratives long exposed as lies. Claims of babies beheaded, women raped, and wombs ripped out—grisly stories which fuelled global outrage initially—were parroted with fervour. These accounts have been discredited by reputable sources, including the Israeli government, which admitted the reports were false.

The willingness of Zionist defenders to cling to these debunked stories reveals the extent of their indoctrination. Rather than engaging with the substance of my critique, they relied on emotional manipulation and lies to maintain the illusion of moral superiority.

Despite the vitriol, I found it disturbingly comical. Responding with wit, and factual accuracy, their arguments were systematically dismantled. When confronted with the "beheaded babies" narrative, credible investigations were referenced that exposed its dubious origins. When accused of spreading "antisemitic tropes," they were reminded criticising a state’s policies isn’t a condemnation of its people or religion.

Their response to logic and facts, the deflection, strawman arguments, and, in some cases, outright silence, showed an inability to confront inconvenient truths only served to underscore their intellectual dishonesty.

The engagement highlighted the cognitive dissonance that permeates pro-Israel discourse. While quick to condemn any act of perceived injustice against Israelis, the same voices are deafeningly silent when Palestinians are the victims.

Families wiped out by airstrikes, children orphaned, and hospitals bombed more than 250,000 people genocided—all under the guise of "self-defence"—are dismissed as collateral damage or, worse, justified as necessary. It’s not viewed as murder or genocide, but as deserving

This selective empathy isn’t accidental; it is the product of decades of propaganda designed to dehumanise Palestinians and erase their suffering. From the media’s biased coverage to the political shielding of Israel at international forums, the Zionist narrative has been carefully crafted to suppress dissent and maintain an aura of infallibility.

This isn’t just about a digital spat on X. It reflects a larger problem: weaponizing social media to stifle criticism of Israel and perpetuate a one-sided narrative.

Zionist aggression online mirrors the aggression Palestinians face on the ground—unrelenting, unaccountable, and often immune to reason or justice.

But it also signals a shift. The increasing visibility of Palestinian voices and their allies is challenging the status quo. The tiresome tactics of smearing critics as "antisemitic" or "terror sympathisers" are losing their sting as more people recognise them for what they are: attempts to deflect from the reality of apartheid, occupation, and ethnic cleansing.

It's really these rabid lunatics who are the modern day Nazis enacting Hitler’s attempted extermination of the Jews, and yet they fail to draw the comparison.

Engaging with Zionist vitriol requires courage, resilience, and a commitment to truth. It means enduring slander, hate, and attempts at character assassination. But it also offers an opportunity to expose the lies and amplify the voices of the oppressed.

As I reflect on the experience, I am reminded of the words of the great Desmond Tutu: "If you’re neutral in situations of injustice, you’ve chosen the side of the oppressor." Silence is complicity, and in a world where Palestinian suffering is ignored or justified, speaking out is not just an act of defiance—it’s a moral imperative.

To the Zionists on X who sought to drown me in their rage: you failed. And to those who stand in solidarity with Palestine, the truth, though often suppressed, has a way of prevailing.