Didn't click on the tweet, but am familiar with things. I've been at things a while, and the protocols may have been the first thing I ever saw on the Internet that was "deboonked".

Notice my use of quotes...and that's my question. Why does fake have quotes around it? Same with Jewish peril. They aren't quotes from the article. The way those quotes are used makes me think the "Jewish peril" is maybe a lie. And "fake" makes me think it was made as a strawman.

One interesting thing to read is current articles about the Protocols...it's like they can't stop talking about it. No joke, there's two things from a Times of Israel article from three days ago (!) that jumped out at me.

One is this quote, "Of course, most importantly, Hitler and the Nazi propaganda machine used the main theme of the Protocols – evil Jewish power – to turn the German people from merely not liking the Jews to seeing them as a grave threat to Germany." Now why is it that the author doesn't address why Germans "merely" didn't like the Jews?

Here's another quote: "In more modern times, much of the Arab world continues to circulate the Protocols as part of a long-time effort to delegitimize the state of Israel and seeing inherent Jewish insidiousness as the underlying nature of the Jewish state."

I don't think I've heard a non-Jew use a phrase like "inherent Jewish insidiousness", and also applying this term to the "nature of Israel". Would any of the Hasbara shills here want to dispute the "inherent insidiousness" of the Jewish state? :)