On Friday 27 January 2023, at about 8:15pm, a Palestinian terrorist murdered seven people outside a synagogue in Neve Yaakov, a neighbourhood of Jerusalem.
This was a cold-blooded, inexcusable, and targeted terrorist attack against innocent civilians. Yet whenever Jews are murdered just for being Jews – the media has a long history of twisting events or making excuses for the terrorists that set out to kill them.
This is the kind of reporting the recent massacre has seen:
The New York Times runs with a ‘fear of escalation’, using the slaughter of Jews as a means to attack the current Israeli government. In another example of twisted reporting, CNN writes about the Israeli army action against Islamic Jihad terrorists that took place the day before – without even mentioning the targets were radical Islamic terrorists belonging to proscribed terrorist groups. An unforgivable description of ‘tit-for-tat’, equating Israel defending itself, with the brutal slaughter of Jews outside a synagogue.
Following this attack we even saw stories about the terrorist’s grandfather, who may have been killed by Israelis 28 years ago. All in an attempt to turn the finger of blame for the killing – back on to the Israelis themselves. When Jews die – it is the Jews fault.
None of this makes sense. Just two months ago on November 23, there was a twin bombing at a bus stop in Jerusalem that killed two Jews. What did that have to do with the Israeli action in Jenin on January 6? Or the killing of Khairy Alkam in 1998?
But when Jews die, the excuses are always rolled out. Let me use attacks in Jerusalem to travel back in time to show you what I mean.
Please note – these are only provided as a few examples. There are 100s of incidents not listed below, and 1000’s more attacks that were not in Jerusalem.
On 8 November 2014, two terrorists entered a synagogue, in the Har Nof neighbourhood of Jerusalem, and attacked those praying with axes, knives, and a gun. Five died instantly, another died a year later from his injuries. The BBC reported on it by spending time talking about Israel’s ‘harsh’ response and ‘weeks of unrest’ (the tit for tat excuse again). What was even worse was the analysis beneath their report:
Personally, I would have thought that a mention of extremist Muslims carrying out 100s of ‘Islamist terror attacks’ globally would form part of any rational analysis in 2014, but that was too much to expect from the BBC. Instead, we are told that there is a long standing tradition in Jerusalem, and religious Jews are trying to change it. Ergo, the finger of blame over dead Jews is once again pointed at the behaviour of the Jews themselves.
There were other murderous attacks in Jerusalem in late 2014 and early 2015 (examples 1,. 2,). Many news reports suggested that Arab anger following the 2014 Gaza conflict was also responsible for the wave of violence.
Back in September 2000 there was no ‘war on Gaza’ to make the Arabs angry. Instead there was Yasser Arafat’s rejection of a peace offer. The Arabs had been preparing for an outbreak of violence and chose to throw away all prospects for peace. Between 2000 and 2005 over 1000 Israelis were killed:
In these reports of Jews being slaughtered in Jerusalem it is possible to see fake claims of a massacre (top left, Telegraph 13/4/02), a focus on Israeli ‘revenge’ (Guardian 5/9/01), and even a claim (also the Guardian) that Jews had driven the poor terrorist to despair.
For the most part though, the 1000+ Jewish deaths were blamed on Ariel Sharon walking on Temple Mount. It is difficult to find a report of the Second Intifada that doesn’t blame Sharon’s Jewish foot for all the Jews that were killed.
In the 1990s, Ariel Sharon’s foot had not yet walked on Temple Mount. It is the height of the Oslo Peace Process, and ‘hope’ fills the air. Jerusalem’s streets are once again running with Jewish blood:
Yes, you read that right. As innocent civilians are blow apart on a Jerusalem bus by radical Islamic terrorists, the NYT actually leads with the ‘revenge’ claim – over the death of a terrorist who made bombs. (This was one of two deadly bus bombings in Jerusalem in early 1996). Can you EVER imagine the NYT reporting on an Islamist terror attack in New York, Paris or London with a ‘revenge’ excuse in the headline about allied action taken against ISIS terrorists?
In 1990 the Jews surely had nothing to fear, because the Hamas bomber has not yet been killed. Yet on 21 Oct 1990, during the first ‘Intifada’ 18 year old Iris Azueli was repeatedly stabbed by a Palestinian terrorist in Jerusalem. Having killed her the terrorist then stabbed to death two other Israelis, Charlie Shalush and Eli Alterez. A 13-year-old boy was also hurt but luckily survived. This Daily Telegraph’s headline about the incident didn’t concern itself much with the attack – rather they were worried about how the Jews would respond. The label of ‘young’ in the headline is just the icing on the propaganda cake:
The first paragraph opens with news about the ‘pendulum swinging’, to make sure nobody feels to sorry for the Israelis. The second tells the reader that the terrorist struck ‘in revenge’ for the death of Arabs. The third paragraph talks about Jewish extremists. The article eventually gets round to mentioning the attack itself (in which three Jews were brutally slain in the street) in the eighth paragraph.
The reasoning is clear. Once again the Jews only had themselves to blame.
Before the Intifadas
The NYT goes out of its way to write about *five* Palestinians who object to a brutal bus bombing that has murdered four Israelis. Most articles on anti-Jewish violence at the time were simply using the war in Lebanon, or the 1967 ‘occupation’ as excuses for all the Jews being murdered.
Another example, this time from 1968, as Jews in Jerusalem suffered from a campaign of bombing attacks:
All the usual elements have been included, such as the ‘revenge’ excuse, and angry Jews shouting ‘kill the Arabs’. In this headline the Arabs are just ‘blamed’ for the attack, even though they have clearly taken responsibility.
So let us go back to 1956 – when there was no ‘occupation’ to blame. This next one sounds familiar – an attack on a synagogue near Jerusalem that killed four Jews.
Between 1949 and 1967, much of the media spent their time excusing the murder of Jews in Jerusalem by referencing the frustration the Arabs felt because of the ‘Palestinian refugees’. Just to make sure Jews elsewhere are not left out – the Guardian (courtesy of a statement by the Archbishop of York) even managed to blame American Jews for all the troubles:
Back in1947 there were no refugees yet to blame. Instead, the New York Times justifies the ‘stoning and stabbing of Jews’ by letting us know that the partition plan was to blame for the latest round of ‘dead Jews’:
That partition created so much ‘anger’ that the Arabs started a civil war rather than choose to create their own state. This was followed by ‘angry’ Arab nations sending their Arab armies to try to kill even more Jews. The Arabs lost the war but did manage to wipe out 1% of the Jewish population.
Back in the 1930s there was no partition plan to drive the Arabs to kill. There were no ‘settlements’ and no ‘occupation’ yet either. But Jews were still being slaughtered in Jerusalem’s streets:
These four reports are all from the New York Times between 1933 and 1937. As can be seen from the first example, the reason these Jews were being killed was because of ‘Jewish immigration’ – the simple fact that they wanted to live there. The final example actually has a headline of Arabs murdering ‘Zionists’. Stunning.
Back in 1929, there was almost no immigration, yet still Jews were still being slaughtered:
This is a very ‘British’ manner of reporting. The Mufti’s (the Arab leader of Jerusalem who 12 years later would sit down with Hitler to discuss their common cause) claimed that Jews died because they provoked the Arabs. The events are even described by the Guardian as a ‘controversy’ between Jewish and Arab elements. In a manner that would clearly resonate with 1929 antisemitic Europe – the Mufti even blames Jewish ‘ambition and greed’.
By the time this article had been written, 133 Jews had been slaughtered – in massacres at Hebron, Tzfat, Yafo, and of course Jerusalem.
Editor’s note: The birth of Ariel Sharon. His foot cannot be held responsible for the death of any Jewish person before this date.
The Mufti had not yet made up his lies about the Jews taking control of the Temple Mount, but for some reason, Jews were still being killed on Jerusalem’s streets:
The official reason (rather than the lie in the newspaper report about Jews attacking them) given for Arabs killing Jews during the 1920 Nebi Mousa festival was ‘Arab disappointment at the non-fulfilment of the promises of independence’.
Things that did not exist in 1910. The ‘security fence’, the ‘siege on Gaza’, ‘settlements’, ‘occupation’ ‘Sharon’s foot’, and ‘refugees’. Back in 1910 there was no British Mandate. The British had not yet even arrived and there had been no ‘Balfour Declaration’. The region is under Ottoman rule. Yet the Jews who live there are ‘still in danger’:
This story is fascinating. The women were shot at and wounded. But nobody would do a thing because if anyone acted against the shooter, the Muslims would riot and massacre a few Jews – as they ‘always’ did – whether the Jews ‘had any connection with the trouble or not’. This is the classic image of Jewish life under Islamic rule. (There is probably little need to also point out that the descendants of the culprit – an ‘Afghan watchman’ who had no doubt recently immigrated to a prospering area – are referred to in today’s media as indigenous Palestinians who have lived in the land since forever.)
There is no attempt here to provide a justification for the ‘excitement’ amongst the Muslims that led to the killing of Jews, but perhaps today, some would put it down to the rise of Zionism.
So we go back to before the modern Zionist movement. Even before the Ottoman’s banned Jews from arriving in Jerusalem in the late 19th century – back into the days when Jews knew their place as third-class citizens, paid money to permit a once-a-week visit to their holy sites, and lived under 100s of degrading Islamic laws. And for some reason, we find that Jews in Jerusalem are still subject to murderous violence:
Or this example in 1847. This one is a beauty – because the journalists do give us the excuse for how it began – Jews had been ‘bleeding’ a Christian child for their celebration of Passover. The classic blood libel.
And even further back to 1834, we find Jews are dying and facing barbarities – committed by ‘Arabs’ – ‘too shocking to relate’:
The story is clear. Jews are attacked because they are Jews. Excuses are created by grabbing at whatever is lying conveniently around to blame. Looking at the history – this is an obvious truth.
My question to today’s media is a simple one. Do your journalists have access to your own archives? And the natural follow up – if they do, why are they not using them because all the evidence they need is inside them? Jews are murdered simply because they are Jews. And in Jerusalem it is chiefly because Muslim extremists are supremacists who see Jews as legitimate targets – as a people without a right to live.
Isn’t it about time – finally – when your newspapers start telling the truth?
Help me fight against antisemitism and the demonisation of Israel
My research is unique and hard hitting.
I battle back against those who seek to revise history and demonise Israel – and I expose antisemitism wherever it is found. I fight when others do not. The results speak for themselves and for eight years I have been exposing hate and creating headlines. But this research depends on community support.
Please help If you can, consider making a donation to help this research in 2023. Your help makes it all possible.
You can make PayPal donations using the donate button below.
Or by using my Paypal.me account.
If you wish to provide regular monthly support you can also do this via my Patreon page
Every contribution is truly appreciated