Evidence and Atrocity Propaganda
Posted By David M. Zsutty On In North American New Right | Comments Disabled
[1]Nayirah Al-Ṣabaḥ was a Kuwaiti girl who testified about Iraqi atrocities against babies to the US Congress in the run-up to the Persian Gulf War. Although her testimony later turned out to be false, it helped to draw the US into yet another military adventure on Israel’s behalf.
1,278 words
The reignition of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict shows how information is one of the most critical aspects of modern warfare. For example, several prominent pro-Israeli political influencers almost immediately began circulating accusations of lurid atrocities in the court of public opinion. The most shocking allegation was that 40 Israeli toddlers had been decapitated.
Atrocity propaganda is nothing new, however. In an X thread [2], Keith Woods laid out its use throughout history. The parallels between current and past conflicts are striking.
In law, whether it be civil or criminal, defendants often find themselves facing serious accusations, from domestic violence to Ponzi schemes to murder. How do we adjudicate these allegations? Prosecutors and plaintiffs certainly have a right to make their case, and society has a right to order, but defendants also have a right to defend themselves. How do we balance the rights and interests of the parties, state, and broader society?
Besides procedural safeguards, we have the rules of evidence, which were developed over time through custom, legislation, and case law. These rules are used to protect the rights of individuals. But allegations of atrocities are much more momentous. They are used to justify declarations of war, and involve the fate of nations.
If so much more is at stake, shouldn’t the court of public opinion have standards similar to the courtroom rules of evidence for adjudicating whether atrocity propaganda is real?
Hard, physical evidence is always the best, especially video footage. In the case of recently alleged atrocities, there was initially a suspicious lack of photo and video evidence, despite how everyone has a smart phone these days. This should have been the first clue that something was amiss. Why tell when you can show, especially when you’re obviously trying to inflame public opinion?
But presenting physical evidence should not be an instant win for its proponent. What if it is fake? A case in point: Ben Shapiro shared what looked vaguely like charred remains in support of the allegation that Hamas had decapitated 40 toddlers. This photo was almost instantly debunked as generated by artificial intelligence.[1] Shapiro took the post down, but not before it was widely circulated — and he never recanted.
If Instagram posts, bloodied knives, and forged documents are subject to careful scrutiny in court, then atrocity propaganda merits the same scrutiny — if not more.
A lot of evidence consists of testimony rather than things, of course. For this, we prefer witnesses who perceived things first-hand rather than “hearsay” evidence for a number of reasons, even if the general rule against hearsay has dozens of exceptions and exemptions. Adam testifying that he heard it from Bob, who heard it from Charlie, can, under certain circumstances, pass muster in court — but it rarely does. Each level of hearsay must be an exception or an exemption. We ideally want the original witness, Charlie, so we can cross-examine him. What exactly did he perceive and how? Is he biased? Doe he have a motive to lie? Is he an honest person? Does his story make sense? And if we can’t cross-examine Charlie, can we at least cross-examine Bob?
In the run-up to the 1991 Persian Gulf War , a Kuwaiti girl, Nayirah, testified [3] that Iraqi soldiers had senselessly pulled babies out of incubators in Kuwait and left them to die. A good attorney would have explored if she had a motive to lie, given that she was the daughter of Kuwait’s ambassador to the United States. A good attorney would have asked for other first-hand witnesses and seen if the stories matched up, or if there were major discrepancies. It turned out that the incubator babies were as real as Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction were 13 years later.
Fake babies can have very real consequences. President George H. W. Bush used them to garner support for his war against Iraq, which caused thousands of deaths, with many of the lower estimates being over 100,000.[2] And veterans suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder as a result of that war certainly contributes to an average of 17 of them committing suicide each day.
[4]You can buy Julius Evola’s East & West here [5].
We shouldn’t execute a man accused of murder on flimsy evidence. We definitely shouldn’t execute war plans which can kill and injure thousands on flimsy evidence, either.
Conservative influencers usually adhere to traditional Western notions of evidence and justice, such as dismissing #MeToo as the fraud that it is. But Ben Shapiro, Charlie Kirk, Donald Trump Jr., and Ian Miles Cheong, among countless other,s have abandoned their usual empirical rigor. They have amplified fantastical allegations which obviously lack foundation. Perhaps this has something to do with who cuts their checks. Regardless, they have acted no differently than the triggered college students whom they usually lampoon. “Facts don’t care about your feelings” went out the door pretty fast.
In law, a witness’ credibility can be impeached to undermine his testimony. This is one reason why most criminal defendants refrain from testifying, as they usually have rap sheets of prior incidents with the law that undermine their credibility. Israel’s rap sheet is quite extensive, including systematic human rights abuses against the Palestinians, spying on the United States, and bombing the USS Liberty.[3] Thus, Israeli accusations of atrocities should be taken with a pillar of salt.
Serious crimes deserve serious investigation, especially atrocity propaganda. If it’s true, it’s horrible. If it’s not true, it’s also horrible, because someone intentionally or recklessly lied. Just as #MeToo detracts from real incidents of sexual assault, fake atrocities detract from real ones.
But most importantly, atrocity propaganda dehumanizes the alleged perpetrator, thereby justifying war and even retaliatory atrocities against them.
Israel has blockaded the Gaza Strip, denying the Palestinians trapped inside food, water, and electricity. Laura Loomer stated on X: “Israel’s Defense Minister has ordered a complete siege on #Gaza [6]: He said, “There will be no electricity, no food, no fuel. We are fighting human animals and we will act accordingly.” #GlassIt [7],” along with a similar but more unhinged rant on Telegram.[5][6] Later, she actually doubled down:
It’s not a call for genocide. It’s a call for counter terrorism. Polling shows 90% of Gazans fully support HAMAS. Why is this so hard for you to understand? You want to talk about the children? Watch this video of Gazan children. This is what HAMAS is teaching Children in Gaza.[7]
To Loomer, the deaths of thousands of Palestinians is entirely justified as collateral damage, and perhaps even welcomed. Even more disturbing is the fact that she was not alone. Genocidal rhetoric has been the norm rather than the exception among pro-Israel influencers.
Those who lie about others being monsters are in fact monsters themselves. They want to behave monstrously towards their enemies, but fear the consequences. Thus, a pretext must be invented to justify their plans.
Atrocity propaganda spreads like wildfire through newspaper and radio, and even faster via the Internet. Thankfully, it can now be almost as swiftly countered. For example, Keith Woods helped get Trump Jr.’s disinformation noted by the Twitter/X community.[8]
It would be impractical to copy and paste the federal rules of evidence into politics. But considering their underlying motives can help guide us on how we can counter atrocity propaganda with empirical rigor. And by countering atrocity propaganda, we can help prevent real atrocities from happening.
* * *
Like all journals of dissident ideas, Counter-Currents depends on the support of readers like you. Help us compete with the censors of the Left and the violent accelerationists of the Right with a donation today. (The easiest way to help is with an e-check donation. All you need is your checkbook.)
For other ways to donate, click here [8].
Notes
https://x.com/poxesfoxes/status/1712592679777771702?s=20 [9] Note: the link has photos of dead bodies