Discovery's "Atlantis" Series Sinks; Plus: Lue Elizondo Joins Pricey UFO Conference

6/2/2021

Today was to have been the premiere date for Hunting Atlantis, a new series from Morgan Freeman’s Revelations Entertainment in which volcanologist Jess Phoenix and genre novelist Stel Pavlou were to have explored various hypotheses for the location of Atlantis before deciding that Pavlou was right to tie Plato’s allegory to the alleged flooding of the Black Sea around 5000 BCE, despite matching none of the details of Plato’s fictitious story. The Discovery channel, fresh off purchasing Warner Media, pulled the show without explanation and replaced it with an extended episode of Expedition Unknown.

Discovery pulled all references to the program from its website, and Freeman’s Revelations Entertainment does not list the show among its projects. Phoenix scrubbed the series from her social media feed. Discovery was still promoting the show just a couple of weeks ago. The change came swiftly enough that many major publications still listed the premiere episode in tonight’s TV listings.

Hunting Atlantis generated controversy online after critics (myself included) pointed out that the Atlantis myth has long been used in support of colonialist, imperialist, and racist narrative, including the Spanish conquest of the Americas, the Anglo-American expansionist colonialism the Age of Empires, and Nazi searchers for the Aryan homeland. Pavlou also attracted attention for a series of tweets, now deleted, defending his views in intemperate language.

Shot on location around the Mediterranean, Hunting Atlantis could not have been cheap to produce. But the optics of glorifying a narrative long used to support white supremacy also didn’t look great the same week that competing channels were honoring the victims of the 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre.

I’m sure this isn’t the last we’ve seen of Hunting Atlantis, not least because they already spent the money to shoot the show. But for now, we should take the win. It’s one less front for science and reason to fight during the media’s period of UFO insanity.

Speaking of which: After arguing for months that he should be taken seriously as an ex-government official blowing the whistle on UFO incursions, Lue Elizondo popped up in an advertisement for “4Bidden Disclosure,” a $200-a-head online discussion with Ancient Aliens stars Linda Moulton Howe, Nick Pope, and Richard Dolan; radio host Jimmy Church; and Billy Carson, who sells videos of himself discussing ancient astronauts, OOPARTS, remote viewing, and “how to raise millions of dollars for your business.” That last video series, incidentally, costs $220, which already tells you how to raise millions of dollars.

Between Elizondo’s appearance at this circus and his recent guest spot on Josh Gates’s monster-hunting paranormal reality show Expedition X, where he attempted to hunt underwater aliens, alleging that there are secret underwater bases of unknown origin, it’s hard to take Elizondo seriously as a sober analyst of national security threats.

The mainstream media—here’s looking at you ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC, Fox News, New Yorker, Politico, etc.—need to stop whitewashing Elizondo’s ties to the entertainment industry and fairly present his circus act alongside his claims to secret UFO knowledge.

31 Comments

T. Franke link

6/2/2021 03:45:39 pm

Citation: "the Atlantis myth has long been used in support of colonialist, imperialist, and racist narrative, including the Spanish conquest of the Americas, the Anglo-American expansionist colonialism the Age of Empires, and Nazi searchers for the Aryan homeland."

I am sorry, but this is factually not true. Spanish and British colonialists did not base their claims on Atlantis theories. Not at all. The Spanish colonialists even explicitly rejected this idea very officially.

There is a little truth in the claim that National Socialists searched for Atlantis, but these were not "the Nazis" but only single Nazis with personal Atlantis beliefs, just like single communists claiming that Atlantis was real (without communism as such having to do anything with Atlantis, of course).

I am still shocked, absolutely shocked, that readers of this blog expressed the opinion that the Holocaust allegedly was just a genocide like any other genocide, and allegedly not driven by pseudoscience but by tribalism.

Und so weiter

6/3/2021 01:05:36 pm

Genocide: The deliberate killing of a large number of people from a particular nation or ethnic group with the aim of destroying that nation or group. See:

Herrero and Namaqua Genocide
Armenian Genocide
Rwandan Genocide

Genocide is genocide whether it be several million or several hundred thousand or several thousand. The Holocaust was bigger in scale but that doesn't mean that many other actions can't be viewed as genocide. The scale is defined by the size of the targeted group and the effectiveness of the killers.

On tribalism and Nazism, see:

Roger Cook. 2017. From Triumph of the Will to Twitter: Modern Media and the Evolution of Tribalism. Colloquia Germanica, Volume 50, No. 3/4.

Franck Usbeck. 2015. Fellow Tribesmen: The Image of Native Americans, National Identity and Nazi Ideology in Germany. Berghahn Publishing.

Contesting reality is not your strong suit.

6/5/2021 04:03:22 pm

a) The Holocaust was -- so far -- a unique event.

Richard Evans: "Thus although the Nazi 'Final Solution' was one genocide among many, it had features that made it stand out from all the rest as well. Unlike all the others it was bounded neither by space nor by time. It was launched not against a local or regional obstacle, but at a world-enemy seen as operating on a global scale. It was bound to an even larger plan of racial reordering and reconstruction involving further genocidal killing on an almost unimaginable scale, aimed, however, at clearing the way in a particular region – Eastern Europe – for a further struggle against the Jews and those the Nazis regarded as their puppets. It was set in motion by ideologues who saw world history in racial terms. It was, in part, carried out by industrial methods. These things all make it unique."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Holocaust#Uniqueness_question

b) Under German criminal law, you will be punsihed harshly, if you dare to deny this.

c) You are not only uneducated. You are immoral.

Jim

6/5/2021 07:02:24 pm

Like fingerprints, all genocides are unique.

Doc Rock

6/7/2021 03:09:45 pm

This is a head scratcher. Mr. Franke takes issue with people for apparently asserting that the Holocaust was just one of many genocides but then provides a quote that discusses the Holocaust as "one genocide among many". Not even sure why this has come up here except as a failed face saving measure in light of the Rich Santorum claim debacle. But anyway, back to the adult table:

Mr. Weiter,

You are working with the generic google definition of genocide. The term genocide was coined by Raphael Lemkin a Holocaust survivor after World War Two. However, his interest in the topic pre-dated the Holocaust and he was interested in events ranging from the Roman destruction of Carthage to the Armenian genocide. The Holocaust did result in the crystalization of this thoughts on the topic, but did not drive the initial interest. So, even the originator of the term placed the concept of genocide in a much broader historical context and was thinking beyond Europe in the course of promoting legislation and policies to try to prevent future genocides.

I will leave it up to the number crunchers to sort this out; but in terms of the number of people eliminated relative to the global population and achievment of the desired goal of total destruction of a nation and people, the annihilation of Carthage and some of the campaigns under the likes of Genghis Khan and Tamerlane could arguably be put well within the same ballpark as the Holocaust. But for many perfectly justifiable reasons I don't think that many people take issue with the Holocaust being the event most relevant to people of the present while being one of many genocides going back thousands of years. I did have the occasional Rwandan student in class who would beg to differ when I lectured on the topic though.

I'm now backing away from this rabbit hole and heading off to Happy Hour. Won't be sipping on German beer today.

6/7/2021 04:20:05 pm

Doc Rock, too, seems to have difficulties to grasp the outstanding uniqueness of the Holocaust. Bizarre. Grotesque. The audience of this blog cannot be taken seriously.

There is a serious lack of sceptical thinking here. They even wanted to believe that the Indians played a major role on key issues of the US society and culture. That even the US consitution would be heavily influenced by them. I see a big, big ideological bias here, and it exists with clear intent. Those who are willing to bend history for ideological reasons are capable of committing atrocities tomorrow, exactly because they believe they would be on the good side of history.

But the good side, whatever this is, can only be there, where the love for truth is, though unpleasant truth may be.

Und so obvious

6/11/2021 07:33:10 am

The term holocaust is not unique to Europe of the 1940s. Various writers have used it in reference to event such as the destruction of countless indigenous societies in the New World, the Sub-saharan slave trade, and the Rape of Nanking.

Herr Frank is trying to move the goalpost again. The debate over Native American influences was refuting Dic Santorum's assertion that they contributed nothing to American culture and Franke's support of Dick by claiming they contributed "almost nothing." Now Franke is claiming that the issue was major influences on key issues in American society and culture. People can read the comments and judge for themselves how uninformed Franke looks whether it be asserting the almost nothing argument or denying major influences in various important areas. Hint: He can't even support this position when it comes to influences on his own German society and looks mornonic when discussing the U.S.

6/11/2021 03:47:47 pm

Nice try Mr Obvious, but everybody can see how you (!) are moving the goalposts all the time. And only as a hint: Declaring well-founded dissent "moronic" can backfire badly.

Please keep it short, I want to stop this here.

Viceroy obvious

6/21/2021 10:54:32 am

You claimed that no one uses the term Afrodeutsch. When presented with multiple examples of the term being used on the internet, in film, in TV, and in print media you continued to argue.

You claimed that Native Americans contributed almost nothing to the development of American culture. When provided with multiple examples of these influences in many realms of American culture ranging from speech and foodways to the Womens' movement you continued to argue.

Now you are arguing against the assertion that the Atlantis Myth has been used in support of colonialism and imperialism despite clear evidence that it has been used in that manner.

You have gone beyond the level of "nice try" to just making a habit of making an ass of yourself here. If you ever become fully fluent in English and become sufficiently educated to productively discuss these various issues and then return to read your past comments here you will probably be inclined to agree.

6/21/2021 05:13:03 pm

Viceroy Obvious, you seem to believe in the power of propaganda: If you repeat a lie again and again, somebody will start to believe it. I, for my part, believe in the power of argument. But only among the educated. And these are few.

Davy Crockett obvious

6/21/2021 07:12:23 pm

Making the same false claims over and over and continuing to defend these claims in the face of clear proof to the contrary would fall in the category of propoganda in the fluent English speaking world.

You have been caught doing this three times. Why don't you try posting an assertion here that cannot be disproven in a manner of minutes by a school child with minimal internet research skills?

6/22/2021 03:56:08 am

Obvious, ... I ask the same question to you: Why do you stay with your belief that you are right although your arguments do not work?

Ben Franklin obvious

6/24/2021 09:32:51 am

If you make the claim that no one does something or something never happened all it takes is one example to the contrary and you lose that argument. As you continue the argument and even more examples are produced you not only lose the argument but do so in embarrassing fashion. Taking the "presence" side of a presence vs. absence argument with you has been working perfectly for several people that have engaged with you. It will continue to work perfectly in the future.

6/24/2021 12:32:35 pm

Obvious ... if you take a wrong premise, if you start with intentional misunderstandings, then you can conclude everything. I repeat: You.

6/7/2021 01:25:43 pm

PS: Just to add some facts.

The official Spanish solicitor to justify the claims of Spain in the New World, Juan de Solórzano Pereira, explicitly rejected the idea that America was Atlantis in 1629. So did the official Spanish historian of the Spanish conquest in the New World, Antonio de Herrera y Tordesillas in 1601. The reason is easy to see: They based their claims on the right of the first discoverer. If America was Atlantis and had been known before Columbus, then this claim had no basis any more. So Spain officially and explicitly rejected the idea that America was Atlantis. These are the two official figures, and their position is clear.

The English often called America Atlantis in early times, but not to justify any claims but just because they believed America to be Atlantis. The English claim to America was based on the same claim as the Spanish claim: On the right of the first discoverer. Therefore, the English brought up the idea that a certain Welsh prince named Medoc arrived in America centuries before Columbus. This was the base of the English claims, not Atlantis.

To the contrary: The idea that the American Indians had been citizens of Atlantis helped early supporters of Indian rights to back up their claims against colonialists. Because, if the Indians once had come from Atlantis like (allegedly) the Europeans, then they would be on equal foot. Though weird the idea may seem, it lived for centuries, and was proposed e.g. by Carlos de Sigüenza y Góngora 1680 and by Gian Rinaldo Carli 1780, to name only few examples of many, against those who thought that the American Indians would be a people inferior by nature.

In short: If the Atlantis story played any role concerning the colonialization of America, then it was a positive role.

All sources can be found in this book:
https://www.atlantis-scout.de/atlantis-geschichte-hypothesen.htm

Besides this question, the following holds true:

Even if Atlantis had been abused for White Supremacy in any significant way (which it was not, not in any significant way), it is important to notice that it is an abuse, and that the original story of Atlantis is not "evil in itself".

It is therefore very strange to oppose an Atlantis documentary just because it is an Atlantis documentary. It may be opposed because this documentary applies pseudoscientific methods. Or it may be opposed if any White Supremacist connotation would be recognizable. But to oppose it, just only (!) because it is an Atlantis docu? No way. You cannot do that. This would be a leftist version of McCarthyism.

The question is also whether "White Supremacy" is the appropriate word to describe Spanish colonialism. I would rather see a "Catholic Supremacy" than a "White Supremacy". And the idea of early English protestant immigrants was, naturally, protestantism. Modern racism just started to rise after European countries discovered the world. Racism as we know it today is a modern concept, having evolved in the 19th century.

Donovan

6/8/2021 04:50:38 pm

Some Spanish writers did in fact use the Atlantis Myth to justify and legitimize Spanish colonial expansion and rule by the Spanish Crown in the western hemisphere. There is a nice summary of this topic in Fernandez Alabaladejo's article "Spanish Atlanteans: Crisis of Empire and Reconstruction of Spanish Monarchy, 1672-1740" published in Culture and History Digital Journal.

6/10/2021 05:53:29 pm

Thank you Donovan for this valuable and true contribution. Yes, there had been Spanish authors legitimizing Spanish rule in America by Plato's Atlantis.

But (a) They were late. Pellicer de Ossau started in 1672/3 while official statements against Atlantis were issued e.g. in 1601 (and the Spanish conequest of America started 200 years before Pellicer de Ossau). (b) These authors were not Spanish officials like the two I mentioned above who already rejected the Atlantis claim with the authority of the Spanish state. (c) The aim of these authors was not really the claim over America but a justification of Spain as an equal among the European monarchies. The aim was to show the other Europeans that they allegedly derived from Spain. The Americas were not in the focus. (d) These single authors did not define any official policy though they may have been popular at their time (for a short time). (e) They had no success. The article you mentioned says itself that the Enlightenment quickly dismissed the ideas and that the last of them, Huerta, never managed to get rid off the perspective that his work was just fiction.

Summary:

Pellicer de Ossau and similar authors cannot serve as examples of "the" Spanish colonialism, just as Heinrich Himmler and his private pet theories of Atlantis cannot serve as an example for "the" National Socialists (while Himmler is at least a real official proponent of the NS regime, though only one).

The article is here:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/286479357_%27Spanish_Atlanteans%27_Crisis_of_Empire_and_reconstruction_of_Spanish_Monarchy_1672-1740

In my book "Kritische Geschichte", 2nd edition, Pellicer de Ossau is discussed on p. 398 in Volume II. On p. 593 of the same volume you find Pellicer de Ossau and Prieto y Sotelo mentioned as examples of having such ideas of Atlantis but having not real impact.
https://www.atlantis-scout.de/atlantis-geschichte-hypothesen.htm

6/11/2021 02:35:05 pm

Justification for something can occur before it happens, while it is happening, or after it has happened. The Spanish conquest of the western hemisphere started in 1492 and continued until circa-1770 when the empire finally reached its greatest extent in the Americas in terms of conquest and effective colonization. So the fact remains that the Myth was used to support Spanish actions and the legitimacy of their claims in the face of competing powers. The only issue is the degree to which it occurred not whether or not it occurred. You appeared to be asserting the latter in your initial comments.

6/11/2021 06:19:50 pm

Donovan: "So the fact remains that the Myth was used to support Spanish actions and the legitimacy of their claims in the face of competing powers."

No.

Please show me any official Spanish statement putting forward Atlantis as an argument. Or at least a statement by any official person of the Spanish state, recorded e.g. in the diary of somebody of the time. You cannot.

The mere existence of (maybe) popular authors does not make something a policy. Also today there is talk of many things in society, but only few of them are really taken up by politics and transformed into real policy and real action.

Just an example: After World War I had started, German industrialists wrote a paper about possible annexations of French coal regions, as a proposal to the German government. Later, certain historians tried to construe the argument that Germany had started the war in order to achieve these annexations. Not true. The paper was only written after the war broke out, and it was a proposal never taken up by German government, never made policy.

Therefore: No.

6/17/2021 11:22:50 am

There is no need for me to produce such a statement since Colavito made no such reference to specific written policy or specific parties involved. A moot point anyway since official policy and practice frequently diverged within the context of colonialism. Rather, Colavito noted that the myth has been used in support of "narrative" associated with colonialism and imperialism. As I indicated, support can come before, during or after an event or series of events. Support can come from many different quarters. The article that I cited clearly supports Colavito's assertion. I don't see any point in continuing the conversation since you are now arguing against points that Colavito did not even try to make.

6/19/2021 06:04:54 pm

Donovan, just to claim any kind of pseudo-"use" (I see only words spoken in the wind here, no "use"), and this in any arbitary way "associated with" whatever you want ... colonialism ... ice cream production ... harvesting ... is a feable argument.

Rackham

6/6/2021 10:27:26 pm

The question is if Atlantis myth was used for white supremacy at some point in history (a relatively short period must it be said, overlapping with the rise of nationalism and other trends), doesn't it means a major proportion of believers are automatically white supremacist? I certainly won't deny a few are, but most of them out there don't exactly make that assumption et generally believes it to simply be "cool hidden history". I'm getting tired of that "crime by association" mentally were a blanked of puritanism (it seems that nasty trend of Anglo-Saxon culture never dies) is put over as much people as possible. When I listen to podcats of nutjobs believing in that stuff, I'm always fascinated by their various and contradictory opinions, many clashing with the idea they are racists. I remember as kid, reading old books by Robert Charroux and Hancock, that I felt their conclusions were generally off the rail, but some elements made sense (well, upon a young mind they did!). I firmly believe behind the few oddball and vocal crackpots out there is a large crowd of people cherry picking what they want from these debunked theories. In a recent podcast, a believer was discussing how he loathes many ufologist and find the "Aliens did it" trope racist and disgusting... while embracing a flurry of conspiracy theories. My point? Most people find Atlantis cool and would love to believe a great civilisation once exist. Its tale of destruction due to its own hubris still resonate. In that sense, the Plato's cautionary tale still work even with all the junk added to it... and no need to sprinkle fascism on it.

***With that said, Jason, what are your thought on the actual "disclosure mania" going on online since a few weeks. It seems to excite a lot of people in need of attention! ;-)

Tony O'Connell link

6/7/2021 04:40:06 am

Thorwald C. Franke quickly pointed out how historically incorrect your comments are. Plato has not been used as a support for racism, but, not mentioned by you, is the fact that the Bible has given more succour to racism than any other document. Do you now call for the closing of churches?

Am I now to be labelled racist because I write or broadcast matters relating to Atlantis?

6/7/2021 01:54:22 pm

Trying to make a search for Atlantis out to be racist endeavour is s low swing. Why? The show sounded pretty darn interesting to me and now we all miss out.

6/7/2021 03:02:09 pm

"Thorwald C. Franke quickly pointed out how historically incorrect your comments are. ,,,,"There is a little truth in the claim that National Socialists searched for Atlantis, but these were not "the Nazis" but only single Nazis with personal Atlantis beliefs,",, (T Franke)

That is only a one sided opinion by T Franke, I will quickly point out how Herr Franke and yourself are wrong.

https://womenwriteaboutcomics.com/2019/09/the-harmful-pseudoarchaeology-of-mythological-atlantis/

" In The Secret Doctrine, Blavatsky discussed her theories of evolution and what she called the “root races”, in which Atlantis was considered the fourth root race. She believed Atlanteans were the ancestors to the fifth and most superior race – the Aryans."..............
"Atlantis also played a large role in 1930’s Nazi Germany when Heinrich Himmler and Herman Wirth founded the Institute for the Study of Atlantis. The institute’s purpose was to find proof Atlantis had once existed to prove the superiority of the Aryan race, because Himmler believed Blavatsky’s claims about Atlantis. Today, Atlantis and the idea of hyperdiffusion is still continually brought up in both discussions looking for explanations of the achievements of people in the past and discussions of nationalistic superiority."
--------------------------------------------------------------
What is all this talk about the Bible ?,,, big ol' red herring.

6/7/2021 04:08:54 pm

Jim,

is "Women write about comics" a premium source on the topic?

Did Himmler really believe in Atlantis as the place of origin of the Aryan race because of Blavatsky? Or because of other sources? And why did he reserve 12 places for his SS leaders at his Wewelsburg, and not 10 as the 10 kings of Atlantis?

Who else among the National Socialists believed in Atlantis? I know of exactly one other National Socialist of higher rank, and that was it. The others laughed about such things. It was the private affair of few, just as in communism and communists believing in Atlantis.

Did Atlantis really play "a large role" in 1930's National Socialist Germany? Do you can show NS school books with Atlantis in it? Children's books? Popular newspaper articles about it? You can't? Why did Hitler mock Atlantis believers in a public speech (the tape recorded the laughter of the audience)? At German universities, the scholars continued to declare Atlantis a fictional place, among them NS careerists. Atlantis did defnitively not play any role in NS Germany, even not a small one.

When I look at discussions about Atlantis today, I rarely find discussions "of nationalistic superiority". By the way, "nationalism" is not "racism", did you know this? And then there is this thing called "patriotism" .... you know it? You are able to distinguish these categories?

Jim, your contributions are often very naive. You really seem to believe many urban myths. You should start to debunk them for yourself.

6/10/2021 09:04:00 pm

"is "Women write about comics" a premium source on the topic?"

Stephanie Halmhofer:

" I hold an Associate of Arts (criminology) degree from Kwantlen Polytechnic University, a Bachelor of Arts (Anthropology and First Nations studies) from the University of Alberta, and a Master of Arts (Archaeology) degree from the University of Toronto."

https://ca.linkedin.com/in/stephanie-halmhofer-m-a-150588b6

"My name is Steph Halmhofer and I’m a bioarchaeologist and archaeologist on the southwest coast of Canada! I’m also a PhD student studying the use of archaeology and pseudoarchaeology by cults in North America.......
.......Some of my posts were written from my own perspective as a graduate student (I graduated with my MA from the University of Toronto in 2017), while others were written from my perspective as a professional bioarchaeologist and archaeologist! And many are written as general discussions about all the archaeological topics I’m interested in, like pseudoarchaeology and pop culture!

https://bonesstonesandbooks.com/

Sounds kinda qualified to me T Franke, how bout you ? What are your academic qualifications ? I doubt you could carry her lunch pail.

"Did Himmler really believe in Atlantis as the place of origin of the Aryan race because of Blavatsky? Or because of other sources?"

Who knows, who cares, nobody said this, only that he shared her beliefs.

"And why did he reserve 12 places for his SS leaders at his Wewelsburg, and not 10 as the 10 kings of Atlantis?"

I dunno Frank, how many donuts can a kangaroo eat in one sitting ?

"You really seem to believe many urban myths. "

Go ahead and name some T Franke, be specific.

6/11/2021 03:43:49 pm

Jim, so she is an archaeologist and an expert for ancient bones? Now, then she is not an expert for National Socialism. Thank you for clarifying this. Experts for National Socialism "dig" in archives, not in the earth.

Jim: "What are your academic qualifications ? I doubt you could carry her lunch pail."

I hold a "diplom" in computer science, roughly corresponding to an MA in the Anglo-Saxon world (it is rather more than that, but finally you cannot compare it. There is a lengthy Wikipedia article trying to explain it. Let us stay with the comparison to an MA).

Jim: "nobody said this".

Errr, o yes! Stephanie Halmhofer said this. In the article on "Women write about comics" to which you pleased to point to. Are you scared by being confronted with your own suggestion?

Jim, I suggest you write your final insult against me, now, and then poor Jason can close this thread.

6/11/2021 05:43:19 pm

"I hold a "diplom" in computer science, roughly corresponding to an MA in the Anglo-Saxon world"

So, no academic expertise in anything you discuss here ? Yet you will belittle actual academics who study these things.

"Jim: "nobody said this".
Errr, o yes! Stephanie Halmhofer said this. In the article on "Women write about comics" to which you pleased to point to. Are you scared by being confronted with your own suggestion?"

Franke, your continuous misunderstanding and misinterpretation of what was said and meant by,,,,,well,,everyone it seems, is most likely the root of your problems.

Stephanie Halmhofer said this:

"..., because Himmler believed Blavatsky’s claims about Atlantis....."

She never noted anything about where Himmler first learned of this or whether or not he was influenced by other sources, only that he believed her claims.

Kent

6/12/2021 03:12:55 am

It's always great fun seeing Jim eff up. Jim.

kent

6/7/2021 10:37:31 pm

"What is all this talk about the Bible ?,,, big ol' red herring."

I don't think herrings come in that size. Hmm, Bible, Bible, Bible....
Oh, now I remember! Take a look at the Hebrew laws of warfare including who can and cannot be raped, and the account, written by Hebrews, of the Hebrew slaughter of the inhabitants of Canaan, which is certainly at least genocide-adjacent.

Finding some of the many other examples is left as an exercise for the reader.