I wonder what they have in the newer versions.

Geez, that one is bad enough and it's 14 years old.

Not only that, for a Harvard grad, it's fairly poorly written.

I do like this part...

Talk about the future, not the past. Spending time giving the public a history lesson on the maps of Israel will put your audience to sleep -- at best. At worst, if you spend your communications capital (time and money) on history lessons of who got what land when and who promised what to whom, it will be viewed by Americans and Europeans as a game of gotcha and not a vision for a better future. Remember—communications is not a test for who can remember the most facts. Listeners want simple messages that will answer their simple, silent question: “What is in it for my country and for me to support Israel?”

So that's bullet point 13 on page 13 (bad luck for Israel maybe?).

"Who got what land when and who promised what to whom"

Haha...the "PROMISED land". Very interesting word choices abound throughout that thing. What does a land being "promised" by someone else have to do with the Palestinians that live there?

Oh, and one more thing..."a game of gotcha".

This is something that you see repeatedly from shills online. They do not want to engage in logical fallacies, so they will avoid questions saying "I'm not going to play your game of gotcha" or something along those lines. They'll say it about Nazis directly BEING Zionists, they'll say it about Nazis being in the Ukrainian army (who would just kill Zelensky if they were "Nazis" according to the Jewish definition). That's a REAL giveaway.