Wednesday afternoon, Jerusalem. The Damascus Gate, one of the main entrances to Jerusalem’s Old City, a place where crowds of people come every day to work, shop, live and pray. Three Palestinian terrorists approached the Old City, carrying hidden knives, automatic weapons and explosives. When police officers questioned the men about their suspicious behavior, the Palestinians took out…
The conflict is viewed through a distorted lens where Palestinian violence is the natural, if not morally justified, response to ‘occupation.’
Whomever was in charge of the headline should have made clear that the Palestinian girl not only HAD a knife, but she was killed while attempting to USE the knife
The Times of London’s Greg Carlstrom ignores the Palestinian terrorist murder of Dafna Meir in favor of a story on Israeli price fixing of school trips to Poland.
Two Palestinian stabbing attacks on Israeli women are described as “exchanges of violence” in the New York Times’ headline.
The brutal stabbing of Israeli mother Dafna Meir, in her home in Otniel, fails to generate much media coverage. Just how bloodthirsty does a Palestinian terror attack against Israelis have to be to deserve coverage?
It’s not so hard to write a headline like “Palestinian Terrorists Kill Israelis.” Yet for some reason, so many headlines blur the lines between attackers and victims when it comes to Israel.
Some media present both Palestinian terror attacks and Israeli responses as morally equivalent.
Why is a stabbing attack described as terrorism in London but questioned when it happens in Jerusalem?
The Daily Mail’s sensationalist headline implies that Israelis are responsible for the shedding of Palestinian blood in the streets of Jerusalem.