The Western media consistently get wrong the sequence of events in the long, and likely endless, war being waged by the Palestinians against Israel. They always start by reporting acts by Israel that are taken in response to Palestinian threats, but leaving out those threats. Israel is always presented as the aggressor, when it has, in fact, only responded to actual aggression or to the credible threat of aggression. Take the latest threat, made on May 16, when the Palestinian media published calls to Jerusalem Arabs, urging them to enter the Temple Mount early on the morning of May 18, the day of the Flag March, for the explicit purpose of being ready to attack any Jews who tried to visit the holy site on Jerusalem Day. The same media also urged Jerusalem Arabs to disrupt the Jerusalem Day flag march, especially at the Damascus Gate and in the Muslim Quarter, by confronting and attacking the marchers as they walked past.
There were threats from Gaza as well. On May 16, Hamas’s al-Qassam Brigades published a social media post featuring al-Aqsa Mosque with rockets flying in the background and the text “the Sword of Jerusalem [the name used by Palestinian factions for Operation Guardian of the Walls] will not be sheathed.”
On May 17, the Sons of Al-Zawari balloon unit announced that it was planning to launch incendiary balloons and stage riots along the Gaza border. Additionally, a “Palestinian flag event” was set to be held along the border, east of Gaza City, on Jerusalem Day.
In other words, the period just before the Flag March was a time of high tension created by this ominous flood of threats coming from the Palestinians about what they planned for May 18.
At that point, in response to this call for Palestinians to attack Jews who attempted to ascend to the Temple Mount, as well as to attack Jewish marchers taking part in the Flag March, the Israeli police decided they had little choice but to act to minimize the likelihood of Muslim violence.
Because of all those reports of Palestinians preparing to attack Jews visiting the Temple Mount or taking part in the Flag March, the Israeli police decided that Muslims under 40 could not enter the Temple Mount on the morning of May 18, knowing from experience that almost all of the Palestinian violence comes from younger Muslim males. The police removed Muslims from the Qibli prayer hall of Al Aqsa after dawn prayers on Jerusalem Day, knowing that after those early prayers the worshippers were likely to do what they did during Ramadan – hurl stones and fireworks stockpiled inside the Mosque to start a battle. Finally, the Israeli police also closed the shops along the Flag March route through the Muslim Quarter, in order to minimize any chance of friction between the shopkeepers and the marchers. The only goal of the police was to prevent violence. As soon as the Flag March was over — a matter of a few hours — the limits on Muslim visitors to Al-Aqsa were removed, and shops along the route could again open. “The media is complicit in violence by only reporting half the story,” Elder of Ziyon, May 18, 2023:
…So now the Muslims are complaining about Israeli restrictions – and using them as incitement.
The original “incitement” was the whipping up, in the Palestinian media, of the Arabs, who were urged to come out and attack the Jews during their march or when some of them tried to ascend to the Temple Mount. As usual, the international media didn’t mention the incitement by the Palestinians, but began their story with those “inexplicable” limits placed by the Israelis on the Palestinians. The media began their reports with Israeli restrictions — and not with the Palestinian threats that prompted those restrictions.
Did you see a single article about the Palestinian plans to disrupt both any visits to the Temple Mount and the Jerusalem march?
No, you did not — except for the story posted first by Elder of Ziyon, and reposted here.
Because the media hardly ever reports the entire story, the Palestinians can claim that their anger is justified by unreasonable Israeli restrictions, and conveniently not mention the explicit incitement and historic violence that prompt those restrictions. Israeli security has to monitor the threats and it has to plan accordingly, but the media doesn’t scratch beyond the surface.
Instead of portraying the Israeli security forces as doing everything possible to minimize the chances of violence while ensuring the rights of all to peacefully assemble, they are shown as going way overboard to suppress Palestinians in Jerusalem.
Palestinians take advantage of this misperception. Fatah preemptively announced that they would hold Israel responsible for whatever happens — a message to the media to stick with the Palestinian narrative that Israel is the only party with responsibility for any violence that ensues.
But the Palestinians who have in past years attacked the marchers, and who did so again Thursday, are the ones who start the violence. The Israelis are only fighting back. Fatah plays the innocent, despite having taken part in the whipping up of Palestinian violence in the last two days, claiming that Israel will be “held responsible” for any violence, and the media accepts this version of events, where Israel is at fault. Why, after all, do those terrible Israelis even have to celebrate Jerusalem Day, and hold a Flag March, when they know the effect on the ordinarily peaceful Palestinians? Why are they so cruel?
And because the media (and NGOs) don’t show the entire story, the world thinks that Israel imposes restrictions arbitrarily and out of sheer spite. This in turn encourages Palestinians to more violence knowing that they will never be blamed.
It is a pattern we have seen for years.
The real story of the Flag March in Jerusalem begins with the Palestinian media whipping up violence against Israeli marchers beginning two days earlier. Those incendiary threats are followed by Israel’s prudent response, intended to minimize the likelihood of that threatened violence, by enforcing a minimum age for male Palestinians visiting Al-Aqsa on May 18, keeping Palestinians away from that part of the Al-Aqsa Mosque where their weapons – rocks and fireworks – are stored, and closing shops in the Muslim Quarter to minimize the likelihood of fights between Muslim shopkeepers and Jewish marchers.
The measures taken by Israel were a justified and prudent response to the Palestinian threats and plans to unleash violence. But that’s not how it will be reported in the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Guardian, the BBC, or CNN. In the world’s media, whenever Israel is concerned, it is always in the dock of a kangaroo court. When it’s a question of arriving at a verdict on Israel, the media judges are always pollice verso.
somehistory says
In a dispute, often times, the innocent are accused of “starting” it, or being the one at fault. People may pick a side before ever hearing the evidence, and then frame things so the he guilty are portrayed as victims.
The media has taken a side…and it’s the side of mozlums; and no one is going to make them report things the way they really are .They would rather be wrong than upset the mozlums.
Truth just doesn’t matter to many people.
James Lincoln says
somehistory says,
“Truth just doesn’t matter to many people.”
Correct.
But for those of us who seek the truth, it is disconcerting to know that many people do NOT seek the truth.
Or, perhaps these misinformed people feel that they already KNOW the truth by watching CNN, MSNBC, reading the New York Times, etc.
somehistory says
James, I do believe you hit the nail on the head…they believe they already know everything, so no one can tell them anything.
James Lincoln says
Yes, somehistory.
That has been my experience conversing with Leftists.
That being said, the conversations always seem to be a trifle one-sided.
And guess which side does most of the “talking”, screaming, etc.
somehistory says
James,
When people don’t have a reasonable argument, they yell, call insults, change the subject being discussed, ignore points made and even threaten.
the reasonable person who knows he is right, will make his case in a calm and quiet manner. Like Clint’s characters in his many movies. Didn’t someone famous say something about “softly…(was it speak, talk or walk?..my mind is blurry today) and carry a big stick”?
In this case, the big stick could be simply Truth.
ed says
Maybe Israel should take a suggestion from a Bonnie Raith song
“Give Them Something To Talk About” and strike first