Well, Jack Frank Sigman continues to provide a phenomenal example of how Zionists sustain their worldview by willful ignorance. This time, he once again accuses me of writing a lie, but to support his accusation that I’ve lied, he lies about what I wrote in the alleged example he provides.
For context, Jack wrote a series of LinkedIn articles attacking me and my writings on the Palestine conflict. I wrote a response demonstrating how, despite his best efforts, he had failed to identify even a single factual or logical error in anything I’d written.
Then Jack tried again with a follow-up LinkedIn article. But it was just more of the same. I once more replied to demonstrate how he had humorously continued to fail to identify even a single error on my part.
Jack then posted to LinkedIn the comment, “Every time Jeremy R. Hammond whines about me showing him to be a propagandist and liar, my book sales increase!”
So I replied to point out how, in fact, he had repeatedly failed to produce an actual argument to support his accusations, and linked to my responses demonstrating that fact.
So what was Jack’s response to that? He once more accused me of lying (bold emphasis added):
More Hammond lies – “Public hearings were held in which 37 representatives were heard, 31 of whom were Jews representing 17 Jewish organizations, but with only one representative from each of the six Arab states.” Hammond implies that the UN officials only invited 6 Arab representatives. Hammond relies on his readers’ ignorance and deliberately withholds the fact that – “the Arab Higher Committee charged UNSCOP with being pro-Zionist, and decided to boycott it. It announced a one-day general strike to protest its arrival, and Arab opposition figures were threatened with death if they spoke to UNSCOP.”
So note first of all that immediately accusing me of writing a “lie”, Jack acknowledges that what I wrote is actually true. It is true that UNSCOP met with “only one representative from each of the six Arab states.”
What he is really arguing is not that I lied, but that I deceived readers by not telling the whole truth. He is accusing me of failing to disclose to readers the relevant fact that the Arab Higher Committee (AHC) refused to collaborate with UNSCOP.
In fact, in the article Jack is quoting me from, two paragraphs prior to the excerpt he quotes, here is what I wrote (bold emphasis added):
At the time, the U.N. consisted of 55 members, including Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, and Syria. Palestine by then remained the only one of the formerly Mandated Territories not to become an independent state. No representatives from any Arab nations, however, were included in UNSCOP. Egypt, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Saudi Arabia requested that “The termination of the Mandate over Palestine and the declaration of its independence” be placed on the agenda, but this motion was rejected. The Arab Higher Committee thus announced it would not collaborate, although individual Arab states did agree to meet with representatives from UNSCOP.
So, as anyone can see, Jack has simply quoted me out of context and then lied by claiming I had not provided that context.
Jacks’s extraordinary dishonesty and hypocrisy provides a useful illustration of the means by which Zionists maintain their worldview.