Michael

It’s pretty clear that this is a denial, I suggest you listen to her speak.

From the article:

“It’s not just the usual suspects. It’s a lot of young Jewish Americans who don’t know the history and don’t understand,” she claimed, adding, “A lot of the challenge is with younger people. More than 50% of young people in America get their news from social media.”

Clinton complained that when she tried to talk to young people “to engage in some kind of reasonable discussion, it was very difficult because they did not know history, they had very little context, and what they were being told on social media was not just one-sided, it was pure propaganda.”

The former first lady concluded, “So just pause on that for a second. They are seeing short-form videos, some of them totally made up, some of them not at all representing what they claim to be showing, and that’s where they get their information.”

If that’s not a denial, what is? Even if there is some amount of propaganda, it’s undeniable the horrors that have occurred. It’s not pure propaganda and she failed to speak to what actually has occurred.

This is literally the same thing as holocaust denial. She’s claiming to be an authority of the history of the region, when in reality the history doesn’t invalidate or excuse what has occurred for over two years against an occupied people.

If somebody was denying the holocaust and making this point in the context of that denial, would you respond the same way and say it’s a totally fair point?