Media bias and Arab incitement – the two major contributors to Palestinian terrorism

Anti-Israel media bias, which I try to document as much as possible on this blog, goes hand in hand with Arab and Muslim incitement against Jews and against Israel to create the “perfect storm” which enables terrorist attacks like that which was carried out in the Bnei Torah synagogue in Jerusalem yesterday.

The bias in the media reporting on yesterday’s attack was quite breathtaking in its scope and in its stupidity. Here are just a few examples:

The Canadian CBC’s quite incredible headline (which was later amended):

cbc screenshot

Screenshot of CBC’s ridiculous headline

Via Tom Gross Media, CNN’s coverage was execrable, first reporting that the attack was on a mosque (can you imagine the world’s reaction if that was the truth?) and then coming up with a headline that distorted the entire story:

CNN’s idiotic, or maybe malicious, headlines, corrected but not improved

CAMERA reported on the New York Times deliberately misleading headline, similar to CNN’s above distortions:

The New York Times, too, is displaying its usual skittishness about headlines clearly stating Palestinians carried out violence.

nyt headline  four killed synagogue attack.jpg

Perhaps maybe the roof caved in due to a structural flaw? Or maybe there was a gas leak? The casual reader who only skims headlines is missing the two critical elements a headline is supposed to convey: who (Palestinians) and what (killed).

CiF Watch accused the Guardian for similarly erasing the word “Palestinians” from their Reuters story on the attack:

However, as you can see, the Guardian’s version (Deadly attack in Jerusalem synagogue) deleted the word “Palestinian” from the headline.


But, that’s not the only revision to the Reuters article by Guardian editors.

Here’s the opening passage of the original Reuters report:

(Reuters) – Two suspected Palestinian men armed with axes and knives killed up to five people and wounded four in a Jerusalem synagogue on Tuesday before they were shot dead by police, Israeli media said, the worst such attack in years.

Now, here’s the Guardian’s version.

Two men armed with axes and knives killed up to five people and wounded four in a Jerusalem synagogue on Tuesday before they were shot dead by police, Israeli media said after the worst such attack in years.

BBC Watch has a summary of the BBC’s tendentious reporting on the story, including this headline which is almost a direct copy of the NYT headline:

Coverage began with typical BBC refusal to independently categorise the premeditated murders of civilians going about their daily business as terrorism.

Pigua Har Nof tweet bbc breaking

In the first four versions of the website’s main article on the incident – currently titled “Jerusalem synagogue: Palestinians kill Israeli worshippers” – the term terrorist attack was placed in the quotation marks routinely employed by the BBC to distance itself from the description.

In subsequent versions of the article – of which there were twenty-one in all – the word terror and its derivatives also appeared exclusively in the form of quotes; for example:

“US Secretary of State John Kerry said the act of “pure terror… simply has no place in human behaviour”. He called on the Palestinian leadership to condemn it.”

The information concerning Hamas’ praise for the attack was removed from later versions.

“Hamas said it was in revenge for the death of a Palestinian bus driver found hanged inside a vehicle in Jerusalem on Monday.”

The BBC did not make any effort to inform audiences that the verdict of suicide was in fact not given by “Israeli police” but by pathologists who conducted a post-mortem, including one chosen by the deceased’s family.

The article goes on to explain the how the BBC distorts the entire background to the latest violence in Jerusalem. They swallow the Hamas line whole and then regurgitate out for their gullible public. Read it all.

I myself watched BBC World’s report on Israeli cable TV yesterday on Impact Asia. At first I was pleasantly surprised by their neutral report on the synagogue attack.

They then broadcast a statement by Naftali Bennett and one by Abu Mazen (Mahmoud Abbas) where he condemned the attack in such faint words it was almost praise. I’m afraid I didn’t catch the name of the female news anchor. She then interviewed a Palestinian representative and Mark Regev. She let the Palestinian (sorry, I missed his name and I was getting steamed at the bias) talk without pause for a minute or two. He “condemned” the attack “but” settlements, occupation, Jews “storming” the Temple Mount … etc.

Then Israeli spokesman Mark Regev was interviewed for Israel, but here the anchor constantly interrupted him and contradicted him. I almost smashed the TV set in. She countered his words that Abbas hadn’t condemned the attack properly by insisting that he had, despite the fact that Abbas had been shown on their own program just minutes earlier. She also contradicted Regev’s words about innocent civilians being killed with “what about the 600 children killed in Gaza this summer?”. Regev gave as good as he got, explaining that civilians killed in war time in urban combat is a completely different matter (besides the questionable methods of counting casualties) to a deliberate terrorist attack on the synagogue. But the anchor cut Regev short again and terminated the interview.

I’m sure you have all seen similar examples of such distortions and anti-Israel bias in your local media. Don’t let them get away with it. Challenge them and provide them and their readers with the correct facts, using my sources here or others.

Where does media bias slide into incitement? CiF Watch gives two very relevant examples:

The Economist refers to Jews who want to visit the Temple Mount as “militants”. When this term is also applied to terrorists, you can see where this leads:

An article published on Nov. 17th titled ‘The trouble at the Mount‘ included the following passage:

THE Temple Mount in Jerusalem is one of the world’s most explosive bits of real-estate. It has started to rumble again in recent weeks, with demands by Jewish militants to extend prayer rights, riots by Palestinians and the killing of several Israelis in knife or car-ramming attacks.

So, now, the term “Jewish militant” includes:

1.  A Jew who wishes to extend prayer rights to Jews at the Temple Mount, Judaism’s holiest site.

2.  A Jew who insidiously engages in Jewish prayer at the Judaism’s holiest site while “pretending to speak into mobile phones”.

3.  A Jew who – as part of a “privately financed” group – buys a home in a previously non-Jewish neighborhood in Jerusalem.

But this is child’s play compared to by Baroness Sayeeda Warsi’s indefensible equivalence of Jews praying on the Temple Mount to the terrorist attack on the Jerusalem synagogue:

Baroness Sayeeda Warsi was Minister of State for Faith and Communities, until her resignation after disagreeing with David Cameron’s position on the war in Gaza, a policy she described as “morally indefensible” in its support for Israel.

The row over her resignation was widely (and quitesympathetically) covered by the Guardian.

Here’s Warsi’s Tweet this morning in response to today’s terror attack, in which Palestinian terrorists massacred Jewish worshippers at a synagogue in Jerusalem.

tweetIn addition to the morally indefensible equivalence she imputes, the first line of Warsi’s tweet was the kind of shamefully dishonest agitprop you’d expect to see at Electronic Intifada.  Israeli extremists have not of course “stormed the mosque”, nor “intimidated” Muslim worshippers – unless you consider the wish to peacefully recite Jewish prayers to be a form of “intimidation”.

Just about all the violence at the Temple Mount in recent memory has been instigated by Muslim extremists, targeting Israeli police and Jewish worshippers.

Read it all.

There are so many more examples of the outrageous bias and slanting of the news reports on the terror attack, together with examples of equivalences of terrorism to Jewish activism, and just common-or-garden antisemitic incitement.

Israellycool has a series of articles which make exceedingly depressing reading:

Shameful reactions to the terror attack; More shameful reactions;  and a list of the 240 (yes, that it is not  a typo) terror attempts just last week!

The terrorists’ families celebrated their “martyrdom” and handed out sweets, along with their pals in in Gaza

Palestinians celebrate synagogue massacre in Jerusalem

This is all besides the inciteful cartoons that I mentioned in my previous posts.

World reaction to the massacre also plays a big part in the prevention (or encouragement) of future attacks. Interestingly one of the only full-throated condemnations of the attack and blaming the Palestinians alone came from John Kerry, as can be seen in this video (via Israellycool):

One last word on this never-ending subject, from Tom Gross’ article which I mentioned above: (my emphases):

As Bret Stephens once wrote about the New York Times When one carefully examines the New York Times’s corrections column, one can see that in all cases the mistakes were made against Israel. “In a more normal world,” wrote Stephens, “a newspaper’s mistakes, particularly in its political and diplomatic reporting, would more-or-less be randomly distributed… Yet while a search of NYT corrections over the past two years discloses the usual measure of forgivable bloopers, not once has the paper erred on the side of Israel. A pattern of bias, maybe?”

Tom Gross’ words can be applied to almost every single international outlet. They must be held to account and not allowed to equivocate. Our lives literally depend on this.

This entry was posted in Antisemitism, Incitement, Media and journalism, Terrorism and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Media bias and Arab incitement – the two major contributors to Palestinian terrorism

  1. RRW says:

    Our own press is also at fault – Channel 10 news – anchored by Razi Barkai and Raviv Druker – two known leftists – had an article that the father of the person who killed the Arab Kid during the war last summer – lives in Har Nof etc. – and shows the shul. This was broadcast a few days ago –
    I think we should hold our own Journalists to task for incitement too.

    • anneinpt says:

      Of course you’re absolutely right. There are at least 2 organizations that monitor the Israeli media for bias and inaccurate reporting: Mida (they have an English page at the site too) – which monitors the authorities as well as the media; and Presspectiva, an associate of CAMERA.

      Besides Channel 10, Haaretz is the worst offender of all, in particular its English version.

  2. Reality says:

    well two can play at the media distortion game.Perhaps next time ISIS beheads someone Israel media should report:Suspected militant slightly grazed humanitarian terrorists neck!

    By the way yesterday with all the news of the attack the perfidious EU are trying to push through a law by which anyone doing business with Israeli companies over the (gasp) Green Line will be blacklisted and heavily fined. Obviously world order, calm, and everlasting rosy horizons of peace will abound if Israel (if it can’t be wiped off the map) would relinquish all land. By the way Spain is pushing for this. So all Jews should stop trying to ingratiate themselves into their good books by declaring themselves Anusim. It was suggested on the radio where I heard about this , that Israels response should be that when Spain has disengaged from Catalonia then we can talk!.i.e.Israel should go on the defensive with every nation (most of the UN countries) that only after they have returned their disputed territories will we discuss ours. Meanwhile,it was also pointed out that if the law passes ,any time their is a tidal wave or tsunami or earthquake Israel SHOULD ABSOLUTELY NOT HELP and claim that all the stuff they need is made over the Green Line

    • anneinpt says:

      I’ve got a bunch of funny (or not so funny) photoshops about pseudo-headlines “How AP or CNN would report” certain incidents. I hope to write another post about it soon.

      Re your other points, it is certainly a good idea for Israel to go on the offensive (not defensive!) when talking to other countries about their attempts to pressurise us.

      However there is no way that Israel would ever withhold aid in an emergency. We are much too moral – too moral for our own good sometimes, e.g. with Gaza – to let innocent humans suffer if we are in a position to help. Certainly it gives us a nice feeling of satisfaction, but that is only momentary. Most of us wouldn’t feel comfortable in the long run with such a decision.

      In any event most countries suffering from natural disasters are not the ones who pressure us or are hostile to us. Most of those poor countries are simply neutral.

      • rrw says:

        its time to stop being moral – and start behaving as they do to us. Plain and simple. No foreign help to disasters of such countries, export licenses revoked of Israel Software/Hardware to said countries, export licenses revoked of medical procedures and medicines to said countries.
        A lot could be done if we became a little less moral, and lower the intensity of the light to other nations…

        • anneinpt says:

          Ain’t gonna happen. It’s nice to think it could but it won’t. Perhaps limiting sale of technology an idea, and we certainly don’t need to offer aid to countries like Iran. In fact we didn’t offer when they had an earthquake not so long ago – that’s after our offer in a previous earthquake was rejected. The Iranian civilians were furious at their gov’t. Good.

  3. peteca1 says:

    ANNE … first my heartfely prayers to the victims of this terrible attack. This was a disgusting and sickening incident, there are just no words to describe it. I am sure that everyone in Israel is horrified!!

    It appears that this more than just a few isolated incidents. Apparently Hamas has decided to conduct some sort of “Grass Roots Intifada” in Israel. Since they could not win the last war in Gaza, they are now resorting to a continuous campaign to murder Jews and tourists in Israel, on a steady basis. It does not seem to matter to them that the victims are happening in one’s, two’s, or three’s. Apparently there is some sort of bigger objective to keep eliminating Israelis relentlessly. Or so it would seem. I am sure that PM Netanyahu and Shin Bet will decide on a way to respond. But the overall feeling – is that things are goinng downhill.

    Anyway, my prayers for everyone in your country!
    Pete, USA

    • anneinpt says:

      Thank you Pete. Yes, certainly either Hamas or one of the other jihadi groups, or a combination of all of them, are out to ignite a new war against Israel.

      Yes, their aim is to eliminate Israel, but in the meantime their aim is to literally terrorise us and demoralise us. It won’t work, not in the long run. We’re used to this unfortunately, and we will win becasue we don’t have a choice. We HAVE to win this war, otherwise it will be the end of Israel and the end of the Jewish nation.

  4. floranista says:

    You know, annie, I just find this so incredibly outrageous and depressing. But not surprising. I think the only way things will change is exactly what people like you are taking the time and effort to do in exposing the bias and downright anti-Semitism. Right-thinking people will recognize the truth. I think Megyn Kelly did some very good, honest reporting about this latest horror.

    • anneinpt says:

      Yes, I saw a clip of her on another blog. I’ll try and find it and post it in a separate post. For sure there are good people out there who do their best to counter the lies. The trouble is that the evil-sayers have the loudest voices and the widest audiences.

      I wouldn’t even care except that words do lead to violence. “Words may never hurt me” from the nursery rhyme “sticks and stones” is not true. Words do hurt – they can lead to attacks such as those we just saw.

      The right-thinking people need to make much more noise. I know it’s an uphill battle but we have no choice but to join together in battle and continue.

Comments are closed.