The Blogs: An AI Accelerator to Dominate the Information Battlespace

PoC: How to Hack and Outpace Anti-Zionist Propaganda
by Jonathan Rosenoer

AI can be used effectively to hack and outpace anti-Zionist (and antisemitic) propaganda. In order to address this adversarial challenge, it is useful to be grounded in the underlying factual context and how myths and conspiracy theories are used to distort it. But facts alone are not sufficient to withstand the social pressure to accept a flood of hostile propaganda, which at its heart is weaponized “public relations.” AI is uniquely suited to defend against these attacks. It can help Jews and their allies Observe, Orient, Decide, and Act (OODA) faster and more accurately than the propagandists—capturing the OODA loop and transforming it into both a sword and a shield that exposes their tactics, protects vulnerable communities, and reclaims the initiative in the information battlespace. I present here a Proof of Concept focused on Nicholas Kristof’s recent despicable article in the New York Times to illustrate how a “respectable” narrative is structured and best understood as propaganda, and therefore how AI‑assisted analysis can be used to outpace and neutralize its impact.

Edward Bernays, the father of modern public relations, argued in Propaganda (1928) that power in mass society comes from “the conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses,” an “engineering of consent” that bypasses rational judgment and targets unconscious emotion, group identification, and the feeling of power that comes from being in the crowd. Bernays treated the public not as a collection of reasoning individuals but as a state of mind, drawing on Sigmund Freud’s insight that a group “has no critical faculty, and the improbable does not exist for it.” That is exactly how modern antisemitic and antizionist propaganda operates: it frames Jews and Israel in ways that appeal to unconscious resentments, moral vanity, and herd identity, then uses social proof and repetition to make those frames feel like common sense.

Because these methods rely on emotional framing, group psychology, and social pressure, resistance has to begin by making those pressures visible and then cycling through the OODA loop faster and more accurately than the propagandists in order to attack their framing and interrupt the reception of their messaging. US Air Force Colonel John Boyd developed the OODA Loop as a decision-making framework for competitive, zero-sum environments. His insight was that a pilot who can move through Observe–Orient–Decide–Act more quickly and accurately will disorient and dominate a slower opponent. A decisive competitive advantage would be obtained by disrupting the Orient(ation) state of the opponent’s OODA Loop and preventing both the propagandist and target recipient(s) from taking effective Act(ion).

Anti-Zionist Propaganda is designed to break the Jewish OODA loop

Modern anti-Zionist messaging aims to sabotage each phase of the OODA loop in the target population. Operating inside our OODA loop, it seeks to shape what people see, how they interpret it, and how they react, faster than we can correct.

Information flooding: breaking Observe

Antisemitic and antizionist actors saturate the information environment with overlapping accusations: genocide, apartheid, colonialism, organ‑harvesting, “standard operating procedure” rape, and more, often amplified by bots, algorithms, and aligned influencers.

The Kristof piece fits neatly into this ecology. It injects a highly emotive narrative—“The Silence That Meets the Rape of Palestinians”—into an already overloaded environment, offering detailed, graphic allegations of “systematic sexual violence” by Israeli forces and prison staff, framed as being part of an “organized state policy.”

For ordinary observers, this is one more shocking story among many; distinguishing between documented facts and emotionally charged but contested claims becomes enormously difficult. The net effect is that authentic signals, such as the documented, organized sexual atrocities committed by Hamas on October 7, are drowned out by a competing flood of accusations against Israel.

Cognitive manipulation: breaking Orient

Orientation is the most critical and complex part of the OODA loop: it is where raw data is interpreted through prior experience, cultural narratives, and emotional predispositions. Propaganda focuses its energy here.

The Kristof article does exactly this. It:

Exploits guilt and complicity, especially for American readers: “our American tax dollars subsidize the Israeli security establishment, so this is sexual violence in which the United States is complicit”
Uses emotionally saturated testimony and NGO language (“standard operating procedures,” “systematic sexual violence,” “organized state policy”) to map Israel onto the role of a structurally sadistic, sexually predatory state
Acknowledges that “it’s impossible to know how common sexual assaults against Palestinians are” even as it generalizes from fourteen interviews and advocacy reports to sweeping systemic claims

For a reader already reeling from the horror of October 7, the article nudges the orientation process toward a “balanced” but ultimately skewed conclusion: Hamas commits atrocities, but Israel is a structurally rapist state, funded by me; therefore my moral outrage and political stance should shift accordingly. The emotional and moral lens has been reframed.

Forcing errors: breaking Decide and Act

Because such narratives move quickly—through major outlets, social media, and activist networks—Jewish and pro‑Israel institutions are often forced into a permanent reactive posture:

Every new viral accusation triggers a scramble to issue statements, investigate claims, and reassure allies
Time and attention are consumed by disproving or contextualizing one story after another, instead of proactively shaping perceptions and strategy

In Boyd’s terms, the propaganda is inside our OODA loop: it determines what people see, shapes how they interpret it, and forces us to make rushed, defensive decisions. The Kristof piece is a textbook example of how mainstream journalism can serve this function.

Using AI to tighten our Jewish OODA loop

To reverse the dynamic, defenders of Jews, Israel, and liberal norms need AI systems not just as fact‑checking tools, but as OODA accelerators. AI’s comparative advantages—speed, scale, and pattern recognition—can make our loop faster and more accurate at every stage.

Observe: real‑time sensing of antisemitic narratives

AI can be used to continuously map the battlespace of ideas:

Ingest and cluster content across platforms (X, TikTok, Instagram, mainstream and fringe media) to detect emerging spikes in antisemitic and antizionist claims (“Israel systematic rape,” “Zionist organ harvesting,” “Israel = Nazi Germany”)
Track which actors—state agencies, NGOs, media outlets, influencers, bot networks—are amplifying which narratives

In the Kristof case, an AI monitor would flag the article immediately as:

High‑engagement and high‑authority (major newspaper, well‑known columnist)
Framing Israel as a systemic sexual abuser, invoking “standard operating procedures” and “organized state policy”
Relying heavily on advocacy reports and small‑N(umber of cases) in the underlying data set, emotionally intense anecdote

That compresses the Observe phase from days or weeks to minutes, giving defenders time to act before the frame calcifies.

Orient: automated decomposition of the message

Next, AI can perform the kind of structured analysis you’ve been applying manually:

Identify the emotional hook: horror at rape, guilt over complicity, moral outrage at Israel’s “silence”
Extract identity frames: the “truly moral” reader is one who now condemns Israel’s alleged systemic rape; those who do not are complicit or hypocritical
Flag emotionally loaded, vague terms: “standard operating procedure,” “systematic sexual violence,” “organized state policy,” and link them back to their sources (UN report language, Euro‑Med, etc.)
Detect the logic moves:
- From a small set of testimonies + contested NGO reports → “widespread pattern”
- From some alleged perpetrators → “the security apparatus” → a nearly systemic moral equivalence with Hamas’s organized atrocities
Cross‑reference source reliability and context: track record of cited NGOs, criticisms, prior retractions, the exact wording and scope of the UN report being paraphrased

AI is particularly strong here because it can compare this narrative structure against a library of known propaganda techniques—from Nazi demonization campaigns to Soviet anti‑Zionist agitation to contemporary digital antisemitism—and label the tactics being used: demonization, double standards, delegitimization, and collective guilt. Orientation becomes fast, structured, and repeatable, enabling a more precise human response.

Decide: generate counter‑frames and response options

Once the narrative is understood, AI can help generate and rank response options:

Craft counter‑messages for different audiences. The “Truth Sandwich” is a communication technique for responding to misinformation or propaganda without amplifying the lie. You start with the truth, then briefly indicate the lie, then return to the truth again—so the false claim is never the first or last thing people remember. (It was developed by linguist George Lakoff, and the name was coined by CNN’s Brian Stelter in 2018.) Accordingly:
- Start with the truth: rape and sexual torture are evil and must be condemned and investigated everywhere; Hamas’s October 7 atrocities are documented in detail
- Indicate the distortion: small, hard‑to‑verify samples and advocacy reports are being inflated into claims of “organized state policy” without robust evidence
- Name the tactic: emotional exploitation, moral equivalence, generalized demonization of the Israeli state
- Return to the truth: support impartial investigation of all credible allegations, reject collective blame and antisemitic double standards
Suggest venue and format: op‑ed, thread, explainer video, legal memo, campus statement
Estimate impact and priority: is this likely to shape elite opinion, mass discourse, or both? Allocate resources accordingly

Humans remain the decision‑makers, but the decision window is compressed and a response can be launched before the false narrative has hardened.

Act: rapid, multi‑channel deployment

Finally, AI can assist with execution at scale:

Generate drafts of statements, talking points, Q&A sheets, social‑media replies that adhere to approved messaging and legal constraints
Identify and support trusted messengers: feminist scholars of conflict‑related sexual violence, human‑rights lawyers, non‑Jewish commentators who reject the double standard, survivors’ advocates willing to speak about Hamas’s crimes and universal standards
Enable micro‑targeted messaging: different rhetorical styles for journalists, diplomats, students, religious communities, all grounded in the same fact pattern

The critical gain is not only speed but tempo control: an AI‑assisted network can respond immediately, shaping how the article is received, rather than giving the frame time to harden.

Hacking their loop: putting anti-zionist propagandists on the back foot

Once our own OODA loop is tight, we can move with speed from defensive reaction to active disruption of the adversary’s decision cycle.

When a narrative like “Israel’s rape as standard policy” appears, a rapid, AI‑augmented response can:

Reframe the issue: stress that sexual violence must be investigated impartially in all contexts, and that equating a democratic state’s security system with a terror organization’s deliberate use of rape as a weapon is dishonest
Call out methodological flaws: small N, advocacy‑driven sourcing, mischaracterization or overextension of UN language
Offer alternative focal points: documented Hamas atrocities; known patterns of erasure of Jewish victimization; the need for credible mechanisms covering all parties

While adversarial networks are still observing the impact of the article and orienting to how to exploit it, defenders have already decided and acted, shifting the interpretive frame for key audiences.

Unpredictability: disrupting their Orient phase

AI can also help introduce narrative surprises that frustrate the adversary’s orientation:

Surface inconsistencies in NGOs’ and media outlets’ coverage of sexual violence (e.g., intense focus on Israeli allegations vs. relative silence on rape in Tigray, Sudan, or by Palestinian forces)
Elevate non‑Jewish voices—feminists, scholars, activists—who explicitly criticize the antisemitic double standard
Highlight instances where Israel has prosecuted or disciplined its own personnel for abuse, undermining the claim of tolerated, organized policy

These moves complicate the adversary’s mental model: they must now ask whether their lines of attack will backfire by exposing bias or selective outrage, consuming their cognitive and reputational capital.

Control: forcing them into reactive posture

If AI‑assisted responses consistently:

Rapidly expose distortions and unsupported leaps
Link new stories into a visible pattern of demonization and double standards
Offer a coherent, principled alternative frame centered on universal standards and factual accountability

Then propagandists gradually lose control over the meaning environment. They are forced to defend themselves against charges of antisemitism, double standards, or disinformation—exactly the reactive stance they aim to impose on Jews and Israel.

This is Boyd’s concept of operating inside the opponent’s OODA loop translated into information warfare: our side observes more comprehensively, orients more accurately, decides more coherently, and acts more quickly and unpredictably, keeps the propagandists off‑balance and folds them back into a defensive posture.

Notes:
1. The Kristof article is at https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/11/opinion/israel-palestinians-sexual-violence.html
2. The OODA analysis of the Kristof article was provided in less than 5 seconds using a closed-system version of Google NotebookLM.