BBC’s Industrial Grade Blood Libel

Posted on July 2, 2021 by First.One.Through

A young Jewish yeshiva student was shot and killed while waiting at a bus stop in the Israeli territory of Area C, along with several friends who were shot and wounded. BBC News wouldn’t mention his name until a Palestinian Arab teenager was killed in the vicinity weeks later, amid a confrontation with Israeli police.

On June 11, 2021, BBC News published an article called “Palestinian teenager shot dead in clash at protest.” The name of the teenager was featured – three times – as were pictures of a Palestinian ambulance and mourning women. There were no pictures of the Jewish student, Yehuda Geutta, whose name was mentioned only once in the article.

The BBC storyline was that the Palestinian teenager was protesting “against the building of an illegal Jewish settlement near the city of Nablus.” The article would repeat several times that the settlement is “illegal” and is “occupied” by “settlers.” It would never mention that the land is in Area C, Israeli administered land as agreed to by the Palestinian Authority in the Oslo Accords.

So a more complete picture of the story is warranted for people who want an accurate picture and not one told by jaundiced mainstream media.

In early May 2021, several students from a yeshiva in Itamar in Area C were shot at while waiting at an established hitchhiking post at the nearby Tapauch Junction. Yehuda Guetta, 19, was hit in the head and died from his injuries on May 5. A Palestinian man, Muntasser Shalaby, 44, was arrested and charged with the shootings and murder.

*Israeli medics and police inspect the scene of shooting attack in Tapuah Junction,*
*near the city of Ariel in Area C, on May 2, 2021. (Photo by Sraya Diamant/Flash90)*

In response to the terrorist attack, several Jews moved to reestablish the outpost of Evyatar not far away. The outpost had been established in 2013 after a similar incident when a Palestinian Arab terrorist stabbed Evyatar Borovsky to death at the same intersection. The outpost was dismantled by Israel as it was built without approvals and permits.

The reestablished outpost quickly grew to around 50 people and Palestinian Arabs came frequently to protest their presence, often setting hundreds of tires on fire as a form of chemical arson to poison the new Jewish residents. One of the Palestinian Arabs participating in the assault said “we come at night, we light up the mountain, to send them a message that they can’t have even an inch of this land.” During one such protest which included pelting soldiers with stones, a 15 year old Palestinian Arab named Mohammed Hamayel, was killed.

*Palestinian Arabs brandishing torches protesting against Israeli Jews moving to Evyatar in Area C,*
*June 22, 2021 (photo credit: Mohamad Torokman/ Reuters)*

The new Israeli government headed by Prime Minister Naftali Bennett just reached an agreement with the Nahala movement and the Samaria Regional Council that Evyatar would not be razed again, after it concluded that the land was not owned by anyone privately. The agreement stated that the civilians would evacuate the outpost which would be turned into an army post and yeshiva seminary.

Meanwhile, the Palestinian terrorist who killed Guetta, Muntasser Shalaby, is being put on trial. The Israeli courts have approved the demolition of Shalaby’s home, which set off a new round of Palestinian protests. Adding an interesting twist to the general arguments about the demolition of terrorists’ homes, is the fact that Shalaby is separated from his wife in the West Bank and normally resides with his three other wives in Tucson, Arizona. It is unclear whether Shalaby wanted to punish his estranged West Bank wife, knowing that her house would be razed after the Israeli police captured him for the terrorist attack.

None of those facts and background were found in the BBC article.

The BBC deliberately opted to craft a story to make the Israeli army out to be thugs who maliciously shoot young Palestinians for simply protesting illegal Israeli activities, an industrial-grade blood libel. It not only marks the BBC as not a credible source for information but one that incites hatred and violence against Jews and the Jewish State.

Related First One Through articles:

BBC Welcomes Release of British Muslim Accused of Beheading Daniel Pearl

Every Picture Tells a Story: Israel Is Scared of Female Iranian Shoppers

The Nerve of ‘Judaizing’ Neighborhoods

CNN and Democratic Politicians Recraft and Redraft MLK’S Mountaintop Speech

Posted on September 6, 2020 by First.One.Through

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) went on CNN and told Anderson Cooper that Joe Biden’s selection of Kamala Harris as the Vice Presidential running mate was the attainment of Martin Luther King Jr.’s dream of reaching the mountaintop.

“There was much reflection, but a lot of tears and a lot of reflection on the history of what we’re making today. What I would say is that so many women have tried to climb that mountaintop that Dr. Martin Luther King spoke of.”

There are a number of problems with this quote by the Black Congresswoman.

First, MLK used the mountaintop as a metaphor for himself in seeing the Promised Land (freedom) but NOT being able to reach it, much like Moses climbed to the top of the mountain but could not cross over to the Jewish Promised Land. The Congresswoman thought that reaching the mountaintop was the pinnacle of success, when MLK actually used it to describe it as coming up short of one’s goals.

Second, to use this particular quote on CNN is horrific. CNN edited MLK’s Mountaintop speech in a particularly noxious antisemitic fashion to cut Jews out of the story in a seemingly poor attempt to disassociate “God’s children” as MLK called the Jews, with the land of Israel.

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee on CNN with Anderson Cooper Aug 11, 2020

Eleanor Holmes Norton of Washington, D.C. also contributed nonsense to the CNN segment stating “We have had White women on the ticket. We have never had an African American woman.” The issue is that Harris is not African American but of southeast Asian descent. CNN did not fact-check the statement nor print any clarification when it reprinted the story. It’s not a surprise as the media outlet which claims that “CNN holds elected officials and candidates accountable by pointing out what’s true and what’s not,” only does so for Republicans and the conservative media.

How far will CNN go to modify facts and history to fit its liberal narrative? #AlternativeFactChecks

Related First One Through articles:

For CNN, The Critical Israeli Facts Have No Murdered Jews

CNN Changes Its Black Transgender Story to Target Police

CNN’s Politicization of Antisemitic Murder

CNN Will Not Report Islamic Terrorism

CNN’s Embrace of Hamas

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

Genes Versus Leadership in the Pandemic

Posted on June 16, 2020 by First.One.Through

The COVID-19 pandemic has received a lot of ink. Much of the writings from the liberal press has had virtually nothing to do with science and much to do with promoting a liberal narrative.

The New York Times pushed forward the idea that radical right-wing men were the worst kind of leaders in a pandemic in a June 2, 2020 article called “Where the Virus is Growing the Most: Countries with ‘Illiberal Populist’ Leaders.” It must have gotten rave reviews because Nicholas Kristof decided to write a similar piece in an Op-Ed story on June 14 called “Nations May Be Safer Under Women.”

These stories are utter nonsense as described in “Where the Virus is Killing the Most: Countries with Socialist Leaders,” which uses actual statistics to show the exact opposite of what the Times conveys. This was not #AlternativeFacts; it was the essence of #FakeNews.

The news today has a set narrative that aggressively seeks an anchor in current events. If the facts don’t fit, the editors will reframe them somehow. Would the Times ever write that the worst hit country in the world by the pandemic is headed by a liberal woman? Never! (For those playing at home, it’s Sophie Wilmès of Belgium).

And it’s beyond a shame; it’s a crime. People are dying all around the world and the Times is playing politics rather than educating its readers and possibly helping point to a cure by looking at figures honestly.

Genes Versus Leadership in the Pandemic

During this election year, the mainstream media is pushing the notion that right-wing autocratic men like Donald Trump literally kill people, while progressive women save people. It’s a narrative tailored to November.

A more honest appraisal of why people are dying from COVID-19 has seemingly little to do with government leadership as much as circumstances. Age, season and genes are statistically the leading indicators of mortality.

AGE: According Worldometers, only 4.5% of all deaths in NYC occurred in patients under 65 years old who did not have underlying health conditions, even while almost 86% of the population is under 65. There is a direct correlation between advanced years and probability of dying from COVID-19.

SEASON: The northern hemisphere was rocked by the coronavirus. Countries like Belgium, the United States, Spain, Italy, Sweden and France were all hit hard. Meanwhile, countries in the Southern hemisphere were barely touched through May. That may be changing together with the seasons with winter coming to South America, Africa, Australia and New Zealand.

GENES: The liberal media has written about the higher mortality rate of Black people in the United States and has both implied and stated outright that it is because of systemic racism. But an examination of Jews and Arabs in the Middle East may point to a very different reason: genes or cultural habits.

The death rate in Israel is roughly 33 people per million as of this writing. Meanwhile, the mortality rate for Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza is only 0.6 per million and in Jordan it is 0.9 per million. A deeper examination into the numbers in Israel by the Taub Center in Israel, shows that Arab infections were less than half of Jewish infections inside of Israel.

Israeli Arabs, Palestinian Arabs and Jordanian Arabs are from a very similar gene pool and live next door to each other but each live in very different circumstances in regards to leadership, yet had roughly the same mortality rate. Meanwhile Israeli Jews living nearby died at a rate roughly 50 times as high. This suggests that either genes or cultural habits account for the dramatic differences in death rates, not whether the leader is male or female (the way that Kristof posits) or a monarch, autocrat or Democratically-elected (unless the liberal media wants to reframe its entire narrative about the besieged poor Gazans).

Seem too far fetched? Tests are beginning to show that people with Type A blood are more likely to be infected by COVID-19 and those with type O blood, much less.

People are dying in a pandemic and the New York Times is feeding its readership complete fabrications in order to secure a Democratic victory. It’s both sad that liberals have such little faith in their party leaders that they need to manufacture tales, and that they use a global tragedy for political ends.

Related First One Through articles:

The CoronavirUS is Not Us Versus Them

“The Death of George Floyd” Opera and The Humanity of Derek Chauvin

Toronto Star Sanitizes Hamas During Pandemic

Liberal Senators Look to Funnel Money into Gaza

The U.N. Doesn’t Care About Middle-Aged White Male Victims of Covid-19

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

For CNN, The Critical Israeli Facts Have No Murdered Jews

Posted on April 11, 2020 by First.One.Through

The bias against Israel in the liberal media is no longer an accusation but established fact.

Consider the salient facts regarding Israel by the largest global media company, CNN.

Its website has a page called “Israel Fast Facts” which attempts to showcase the most relevant information about the modern state of Israel.

The “Timeline” runs from November 2, 1917 until January 28, 2020 (as of this writing). From the 1917 Balfour Declaration until Israel’s independence in May 1948, CNN wrote that there were “riots” between 1936 and 1939 due to “tensions between Arabs and Jewish settlers.”

For CNN, every single Jew who came to Palestine was a “settler.” In today’s parlance, CNN and the liberal media call any Jew living east of the 1949 Armistice Lines a “settler” committing an illegal activity. Does CNN believe that every Jew who came to Palestine did so illegally? The facts that Jews have been a majority in Jerusalem since the 1860’s and many thousands of Jews lived in the land for years is unmentioned and irrelevant.
The “riots” included massacres of Jewish civilians as in Hebron in 1929. However, no blame on Arabs or Jewish victims are noted.
The 1936-9 Arab riots resulted in the British succumbing to Arab pressure to issue a White Paper limiting the immigration of Jews into Palestine to 75,000 over five years, just as the Holocaust in Europe was starting. CNN failed to mention the Arab riots not only killing hundred of Jews in Palestine but resulting in over 100,000 dead Jews in Europe.

Two papal visits are listed in CNN’s timeline, in 1964 and 2000. It is unclear how that is critical to the history of Israel as CNN does not list papal visits to other countries like Lebanon in their timelines.

Dozens of Palestinian terrorist attacks around the world are unmentioned, and the sole attack listed by CNN was the slaughter of Israeli athletes at the 1972 Olympic Games, which failed to label the terrorists as Palestinian.

There is no mention of Hamas being formed in 1987, the publication of its anti-Semitic charter calling for the killing of Jews and destruction of Israel in 1988, its election to a majority of the Palestinian parliament in 2006 or its routing of Fatah and takeover of the Gaza Strip in 2007.

No mention of Israel’s peace agreement with Jordan in 1994.

While CNN mentioned the Gaza Disengagement Plan in December 2003, it failed to mention the April 2004 letter from US President George W. Bush to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in conjunction with such action, clearly stating the US position that a two-state solution would NOT run along the 1949 Armistice Lines.

The May 2010 Turkish flotilla to Gaza is referred to as bringing “humanitarian supplies,” in which “nine activists” were killed by Israeli commandos. Lost in this description was that the boat refused to dock peacefully in an Israeli port to have the supplies delivered to Gaza and that the “activists” actively beat the Israelis with the soldiers responding in a defensive action.

Continuing its theme of Israelis being aggressors, CNN wrote about Israeli confrontations with Hamas in 2008, 2014 and 2018 mentioning the number of Palestinians killed but never mentioning any Israelis killed or injured.

CNN map of Israel, referring to “East Jerusalem,” a place that only existed for 19 years as an artifice of war

CNN’s timeline of Israel’s history includes thousands of dead Palestinians at the hands of Israelis but not a single dead or injured Israeli by Palestinians. It further minimized Palestinian terrorist attacks against Jews around the world with only a solitary mention of the massacre of Israeli athletes at the Olympics and even then, refusing to state the terrorists were Palestinian.

And CNN goes further to label Israelis as militants and Palestinians as victims by describing every Jew that ever came to Israel as a “settler,” inherently deserving of Arab wrath.

Related First One Through articles:

Christiane Amanpour is More Anti-Semitic Than Ilhan Omar

CNN’s Politicization of Antisemitic Murder

CNN Will Not Report Islamic Terrorism

Social Media’s “Fake News” and Mainstream Media’s Half-Truths

Review of Media Headlines on Palestinian Arab Terror Spree

American Leaders Always Planned on Israel Absorbing Much of the West Bank

Posted on January 30, 2020 by First.One.Through

The liberal press is counting on people’s terrible memory and fondness for their cherished presidents Jimmy Carter and Barack Obama to convey a false history of the Middle East. It boldly lies that American politicians have always viewed the contours of Israel to be roughly along the 1949 Armistice Lines, commonly referred to as the Green Line and that Israel would uproot its’ civilian population in the West Bank much as it did in Gaza. Consider The New York Times’ article “What’s in a Peace Plan: Settlements and a Goal of a Palestinian State” on January 30, 2020. The article was full of distortions including: “The United States has long voiced support for the creation of a Palestinian state with only slight adjustments to the Israeli boundaries that existed before the Arab-Israeli war of 1967, when Israel wrested the West Bank from Jordan, and Gaza from Egypt.”

The New York Times January 30, 2020 Page A8

That is total nonsense, meant to make Donald Trump’s plan look like a complete break with the past (a past which must be noted never produced a peace deal). To describe reality, read the letter that President George W Bush wrote to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon on April 14, 2004, after Sharon announced that he was going to withdraw all Israelis from Gaza: “In light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli populations centers, it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949, and all previous efforts to negotiate a two-state solution have reached the same conclusion. It is realistic to expect that any final status agreement will only be achieved on the basis of mutually agreed changes that reflect these realities.” That is the essence of the Trump plan – reflecting the reality of over half a million Israelis living in communities in the West Bank. This position of Israel incorporating Israeli population centers in the West Bank was reflected in the Democratic party as well, until Obama pivoted away from Israel towards the Muslim world in the hope of creating a “new beginning.” Look at the 2008 Democratic platform’s point on Israel: “All understand that it is unrealistic to expect the outcome of final status negotiations to be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949.” The Democrats-of-old also agreed with the Trump initiative recommendation that Jerusalem remain a unified city and the capital of Israel. The 2008 Democrats stated: “Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel. The parties have agreed that Jerusalem is a matter for final status negotiations. It should remain an undivided city accessible to people of all faiths.” But the current contenders for the president from the Democratic Party (other than Mike Bloomberg) have run from Israel and the notion that Jerusalem should remain the unified capital of Israel. They are the one’s who have turned on long-standing American policy, not Trump. But the liberal media will lie, distort history and tell you #AlternativeFacts like “Israel wrested the West Bank from Jordan” without adding that Jordan attacked Israel in 1967 and Israel took the territory – which Jordan had illegally annexed in 1950 – in a defensive war. The Times article likewise wrote that “[p]revious American proposals spoke of uprooting tens of thousands of Israelis from the settlements to return those areas to Palestinians.” As seen above, that’s a lie. Further, there could be no “return… to Palestinians” as the Israelis would have had to return the land to Jordanians who illegally occupied the land, not Palestinians who never controlled the area. Do not be swayed by the #FakeNews that the Trump peace plan is a radical change of American policy. It just appears that way after eight years of Obama distancing himself from Israel and the current anti-Zionist edge infecting the left-wing media and politicians. Before Obama, Israel truly was a bipartisan cause in which the contours of the Trump peace plan would have been endorsed by all.

Related First One Through articles: When the Democrats Opposed the Palestinian “Right of Return” The Democrats’ Slide on Israel Bernie Sanders is the Worst U.S. Presidential Candidate for Israel Ever Will the 2020 Democratic Platform Trash Israel? The Peace Proposal Monologues New York Times Lies about the Gentleness of Zionism Related First One Through videos: The 1967″Borders” (music by The Kinks) US and Israel Are There For Each Other (music by Michael Jackson) Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis and FirstOneThrough

NY Times Hides Abbas’s Violence and Pence’s Truth

Posted on January 24, 2018 by First.One.Through

The New York Times blatant bias towards the Palestinian narrative was in stark display in articles reviewing the speeches given by the acting-President of the Palestinian Authority Mahmoud Abbas to a large audience of politicians in Ramallah on January 14, 2018, and of the one given by US Vice President Mike Pence to the Israeli Parliament on January 22, 2018.

Hiding Palestinian Violence

The Times article appeared on the top of page A8 accompanied by a color picture of Abbas. The article relayed Abbas’s speech with supporting commentary throughout the article. Only at the very end of the piece, did the Times offer any competing viewpoints.

During its supporting description of Abbas’s speech, the Times deliberately chose to portray Abbas as a man of peace and hope.

NYT: “Indeed, Mr. Abbas, who reaffirmed his commitment to non-violence and stopping terrorism, seemed to hold out hope of a return to negotiations – but with someone other than the United States leading the way.”

What did Abbas actually say during his remarks to his Arab audience?

Abbas: “We always and forever adhere to negotiations as the path to reach a political settlement with Israel. We don’t want war. We will not call for a military war with Israel. Whoever has [weapons] – go ahead and do it. I say this out in the open. If you have weapons, go ahead. I’m with you, and I will help you. Anyone who has weapons can go ahead. I don’t have weapons. I want the peaceful political path to reach a settlement.”

Not only did the Times chose to negate the remarks in which Abbas supported those who used terrorism, the paper opted to not give any clarification about why the United States has been accusing Abbas for supporting terrorism:

Abbas: “The Americans are always telling us that we must stop paying salaries to the families of the martyrs and the prisoners. We categorically reject this demand. Under no circumstances will we allow the families of the martyrs, the wounded, and the prisoners to be harmed. These are our children, our families. We are proud of them, and we will pay them before we pay the living.”

Why didn’t the paper use the Abbas statement to comment that Congress had voted on the Taylor Force Act to demand that the PA stop paying terrorist to kill Jews? Because if it did so, it would be shining a light on the despicable Palestinian action promoting murder?

In regards to reconciling with a terrorist group, the Times would add no color that the US designates Hamas as a terrorist group. It merely stated that “reunification” was a chance to bring the two physical Palestinian territories together, but it made no mention of incorporating the anti-Semitic terrorist group into a governing role in the Palestinian Authority:

NYT: “Addressing hundreds of P.L.O. members, Mr. Abbas urged the Council to emphasize unification talks aimed at bringing Hamas, the Islamic militant group that rules the Gaza Strip, into the Palestinian fold. ‘A state without Gaza is not possible,’ he said. ‘A state in Gaza is not possible.’”

Instead, the Times talked of Abbas as a man of hope, a man who continued to push for a two-state solution and peaceful coexistence with Israel:

NYT: “Mr. Abbas, 82, stopped well short of embracing an alternative to a two-state solution, the project around which he has built his career. The number of Israelis and Palestinians who hold out hope that such a solution can be achieved is dwindling, but Mr. Abbas said nothing about abandoning it.

“He also shied away from urging the kind of provocative acts, like ending the Palestinian Authority’s security cooperation with Israel or disbanding the authority itself, that could raise the costs of occupation for Israel and shake officials in Jerusalem and Washington.”

The Times did not clarify why so many people have become disillusioned with a peace based on a two-state solution, such as an intifada running from 2000 to 2005, and wars raging from Gaza in 2008, 2012 and 2014 killing thousands, even after Israel withdrew all civilians and military forces from Gaza in 2005.

When the Times opted to mention the vile screed of Abbas that the Jews have nothing to do with Israel, it did so at the very end of the article, with an introduction that let people dismiss the content, and with a conclusion that allowed the statement to stand.

NYT: “Testing his audience’s attention, Mr. Abbas also gave a lengthy history lecture reaching back to the 17^th century, saying that Oliver Cromwell had first proposed shipping European Jews to the Holy Land, before tracing the beginning of Zionism to what he called the 19^th-century journalist and activist Theodor Herzl’s efforts to ‘wipe out Palestinians from Palestine.’

“’This is a colonial enterprise that has nothing to do with Jewishness,’ Mr. Abbas said. ‘The Jews were used as a tool under the concept of the promised land – call it whatever you want. Everything has been made up.’

“Neither Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu nor Trump administration officials offered any immediate response.”

Did the Times attack this fake history? No. Did it call out Abbas’ rewriting of the entire Old Testament? No. Did it mention that Abbas also claimed that the Arab countries didn’t really evict a million Jews? No. Did it recount Abbas’s doctoral thesis on Holocaust denial? No. Did it mention that the United Nations has similarly been denying Jewish connection to Jerusalem? No.

The sloppy New York Times journalism gave a pass to Abbas’s #FakeHistory, and allowed its readership to question the very legitimacy of the Jewish State, just as the Palestinian narrative demands.

Hiding Pence’s Truth

On January 23, 2018 the Times covered the speech that Vice President Mike Pence delivered to the Israeli Knesset. The article would feature no picture of Pence standing in Israel’s capital of Jerusalem.

To begin, the Times did not begin to quote Pence until paragraph 9, compared to paragraph 2 in the Abbas story. The Times needed to lay the groundwork of how upset the Palestinians were to frame the article:

NYT: “Palestinians claim Jerusalem as their capital or believe it should be divided, with East Jerusalem becoming the capital of a Palestinian state.”

No Times clarification that Palestine is not yet a state.

NYT: “The international consensus, previously supported by the United States, has been that the city’s status can be determined only through negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians.”

The Times deliberately misled its readers that that the Trump administration had said the same.

NYT: “Arab lawmakers rose to their feet at the start of Mr. Pence’s speech in the Israeli Parliament and held up signs reading ‘Jerusalem is the capital of Palestine.’ Ushers pulled down the signs and escorted them out of the room, to the applause of others in the hall.“

The phrasing did not make clear that the standing ovation by the members of Knesset was in favor of expelling the Arabs and drowning out their protest.

NYT: “Mr. Trump has also threatened to shutter an office of the Palestine Liberation Organization in Washington and cut American donations to the United Nations agency that provides services for Palestinian refugees.“

Once again there was no detail that Trump was taking these moves because the Palestinians support terror and refuse to come to the negotiating table.

NYT: “That approach has been welcomed by many Israelis, while rankling with Palestinians, whose political and religious leaders have refused to meet Mr. Pence.“

The Times took its time to set up the article that everything that Pence had to say was objectionable and unwelcome. It did nothing of the sort to introduce the Abbas speech.

Throughout the Pence article, in paragraph after paragraph, the Times countered every statement with a Palestinian narrative, a complete reversal of the Abbas article a week earlier when a counter-opinion of the Israeli perspective was only given at the very end of the article, and then, only muted.

NYT: “We stand with Israel because we believe in right over wrong, in good over evil and in liberty over tyranny,” Mr. Pence said.

“Mr. Pence, an evangelical Christian, dotted his address with biblical references and spoke of the Jewish connection to Jerusalem in historical and religious terms.“

Correction: Pence’s initial remarks had to do with the broad connection between the United States and Israel, one of “shared values.” He spoke of George Washington, John Adams and Abraham Lincoln who supported the great contributions of Jews to America and the world, and their rights to live in the Holy Land.

Did the Times write that Abbas is an Arab Muslim when he belittled the Bible? Nope. But it decided to highlight Pence’s religion. It was a setup for the ‘messianic extremist’ comment by Saeb Erekat to come later in the article.

NYT: “He scarcely mentioned the Palestinians and did not refer to their history in the Holy Land, nor to their territorial claims.”

Did the Times write about the 3700-year history of the Jews in Jerusalem during the Abbas speech write-up? About the Jewish Temples? That Jews have been a majority in Jerusalem since the 1860s? No, why would it? The Times is part of the Palestinian propaganda machine.

NYT: “The Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, will not meet Mr. Pence. He has called Mr. Trump’s Jerusalem declaration ‘a slap in the face.’

“Saeb Erekat, the chief negotiator for the Palestinians, said that Mr. Pence’s ‘messianic discourse’ was ‘a gift to the extremists.’

“‘His message to the rest of the world is clear: violate international law & resolutions and the US will reward you,’ he said, according to his office’s Twitter account.”

Quite some airtime for the Palestinian point of view.

In the final paragraph, the Times opted to slam Pence yet again in another distortion of facts:

NYT: “Mr. Pence canceled his last planned trip to the Holy Land before Christmas after Christian Arab leaders declined to meet with him.“

No, Pence delayed his last trip to secure a vote on the GOP tax bill.

The Times gave a podium to a man that negated the history and rights of Jews in Israel and who supports terrorists both in language and money, printing 304 words of Abbas’s speech. It did not challenge a single word of his screed. Meanwhile, the paper took great pains to negate and belittle the US Vice President’s remarks, printing a mere 45 words of Pence’s speech.

Additional editions of #AllThePalestinianProgandaFitToPrint

Related First.One.Through articles:

Abbas’ European Audience for His Rantings

The New York Times Inverts the History of Jerusalem

The Arguments over Jerusalem

750 Years of Continuous Jewish Jerusalem

The Custodianship of a Child and Jerusalem

Palestinians agree that Israel rules all of Jerusalem, but the World Treats the City as Divided

What do you Recognize in the Palestinians?

The Palestinians aren’t “Resorting to Violence”; They are Murdering and Waging War

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

The New York Times Inverts the History of Jerusalem

Posted on December 6, 2017 by First.One.Through

On December 6, 2017, on the eve of President Donald Trump recognizing that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, the New York Times decided to give its readers a primer on #FakeHistory.

The article entitled “The Current Conflict in Jerusalem Is Distinctly Modern,” gave a 100-year history that not only omitted important facts, it told a story that was an inversion of truth. Specifically:

The NYT led readers to believe that Jerusalem was an Arab city and that Jews recently began to immigrate there, when IN FACT, Jews have been a majority in Jerusalem since the 1860s
The NYT led readers to conclude that Jerusalem has never been important to Jews, and that it is just a recent phenomenon of right-wing Zionists, when IN FACT, Jerusalem has been central to Judaism for 3000 years for all Jews
The NYT will talk about the “corpus separatum” of the 1947 partition plan, but only refer to Jerusalem, when IN FACT, the Holy Basin referred to Greater Bethlehem and Greater Jerusalem, and Israel gave control of Bethlehem to the Palestinians 20 years ago

Below are some details highlighting the liberal rag’s distortions.

The Myth of Colonial Fingerprints

The lead-in to the article began to orient the reader about distinct 20th century aspects to the current conflict surrounding Jerusalem. It stated:

“the current one is a distinctly 20th century story, with roots in colonialism, nationalism and antisemitism.”

How was the story of Jerusalem remotely one of colonialism? Several international powers broke up the Ottoman Empire after its collapse; was Syria a French colonial enterprise? Read more in “Israel was never a British Colony; Judea and Samaria are not Israeli Colonies.”

The article would go on to describe the nationalism of “religious settlers,” but never touch upon the deep antisemitism pervasive in Palestinian culture and actions.

Jewish Majority in Jerusalem for 150 Years

The article repeated long-standing #FakeNews by anti-Zionists that Jews were new-comers to Jerusalem, invading an Arab city:

“The three decades of British rule that followed Allenby’s march on Jerusalem saw an influx of Jewish settlers drawn by the Zionist vision of a Jewish homeland, while the local Arab population adjusted to the reality of the collapsed Ottoman Empire, which had ruled the city since 1517…. For Arabs, he said: ‘There was something of the shock at not being in the Ottoman Empire. There was a reordering of their society. The local Palestinian aristocracy, the big families of Jerusalem, emerged as leaders of the Palestinian national movement, which was suddenly being confronted by Jewish migration. Opposition to that migration fueled several deadly riots by Palestinians…‘”

This is an outrageous lie. The Times would have readers believe that there was an Arab majority in Jerusalem for 400 years. These “local Arabs” watched helplessly as the British allowed these foreigners to take over their city.

There were various demographic studies taken of Jerusalem for the past few centuries. They all agree that Jews have been a majority in the city since at least 1870, with the percentage growing well before the British took over in 1922.

Jerusalem population statistics from the JewishVirtualLibrary, which compiled statistics from a variety of places:

Year	Jews	Arabs/Muslims	Christians/Other	Total
1844	7,120	5,000	3,390	15,510
1876	12,000	7,560	5,470	25,030
1896	28,112	8,560	8,748	45,420
1922	33,971	13,411	4,699	52,081
1931	51,222	19,894	19,335	90,451
1948	100,000	40,000	25,000	165,000
1967	195,700	54,963	12,646	263,309
1987	340,000	121,000	14,000	475,000

From IsraelPalestinian.procon.org which also compiled data from various British censuses.

Year	Jews	Arabs/Muslims	Christians/Other	Total
1910	45,000	12,000	12,900	69,900
1922	34,000	13,500	14,600	62,500
1931	51,000	19,900	19,300	90,500
1946	99,300	33,700	31,400	164,400
1967	196,800	58,100	12,900	267,800
1972	261,100	74,400	11,800	347,300
1983	346,700	112,100	13,900	472,700
1995	486,600	171,700	13,900	672,2000

Jerusalem and Its Environs: Quarters, Neighborhoods, Villages, 1800-1948 by Ruth Kark, Michal Oren-Nordheim detailed the growth of Jews in Jerusalem after the Crimean War.

Year	Jews	Arabs/Muslims	Christians/Other	Total
1866	8,000	4,000	4,000	16,000
1887	28,000	7,560	7,070	42,630
1913	48,400	10,050	16,750	90,500
1931	51,222	19,894	19,335	90,503
1945	97,000	30,630	29,350	157,080

Regardless of the source of information, Jews were clearly the dominant religious group in Jerusalem for as much as 30 years before the first Zionist Congress, and 50 years before the Balfour Declaration. To state that the Jews were interlopers into an Arab city is patently false and a complete inversion of history and fact.

This is part of an ongoing false narrative that the New York Times gives its readers even regarding current events. For a despicable example, read “The New York Times will Keep on Telling You: Jews are not Native to Israel,” in which every Israeli – even those whose parents and grandparents were born in Israel – was described as a foreigner, while every Arab was described as a local.

The 1947 Partition Plan Included Bethlehem

The Times continued to go over history, touching upon the 1947 UN Partition Plan.

“After the war, in 1947, the United Nations approved a partition plan that provided for two states – one Jewish, one Arab – with Jerusalem governed by a ‘special international regime’ owing to its unique status. The Arabs rejected the partition plan,… Jerusalem was divided: The western half became part of the new state of Israel (and its capital under an Israeli law passed in 1950), while the eastern half, including the Old City, was occupied by Jordan.”

The Times will forever refuse to correctly state that the Holy Basin in the partition plan was much larger than just Jerusalem, and included Greater Bethlehem.

The “corpus separatum” of the 1947 UN Partition Plan

Israel handed control of Bethlehem to the Palestinian Authority in December 1995 as part of launching the Oslo Accords with some tangible results. That concession of handing over half of the corpus separatum is never mentioned by the Times.

The Crimes of Jordan

The fact that Jordan’s annexation of the West Bank, the eastern half of Jerusalem and Bethlehem were not sanctioned by the international community is NEVER mentioned, while the world’s opinion about Israel’s taking of the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem is ALWAYS mentioned.

The fact that Jordan evicted all of the Jews from the eastern half of Jerusalem and the West Bank is NEVER mentioned.

The fact that Jordan gave citizenship to all Arabs in the newly acquired territories but specifically excluded Jews is NEVER mentioned.

Because for the Times, the problem is the Jews.

The Lie that Israel Doesn’t Care about Jerusalem

Throughout the article, the Times sought to portray Israeli Jews as ambivalent about Jerusalem as a capital city:

“It was the for the British that Jerusalem was so important – they are the ones who established Jerusalem as a capital… It was not anyone’s capital since the times of the First and Second Temple.”
“Paradoxically, Zionism recoiled from Jerusalem, particularly the Old City,.. first because Jerusalem was regarded as a symbol of the diaspora, and second because the holy sites to Christianity and Islam were seen as complications that would not enable the creation of a Jewish state with Jerusalem as its capital.”
“Jerusalem was something of a backwater, a regression to a conservative culture that they [early Zionists] were trying to move away from,”
“The early Israeli state was hesitant to focus too much on Jerusalem, given pressure from the United Nations and European powers,”
“Having accepted the idea of international control of Jerusalem, the early Israeli leadership sought alternatives for a capital, perhaps Herzliya or somewhere in the south,”

Get the message? Israel really was never focused on Jerusalem until the 1967 war, according the Times.

But how does that warped narrative fit into the following facts:

Jews moved to Jerusalem both before and after the British Mandate took effect in remarkable numbers, as detailed above
The Israeli national anthem, written in 1877, was focused completely on Jerusalem.
Israel made Jerusalem its capital shortly after the war of independence concluded, in 1950. It placed all of its governmental buildings there.

All of these facts about the early Zionists also doesn’t include the facts that Jews have always faced Jerusalem when they pray, regardless of where they are in the world. They pray for the return to Jerusalem and the reestablishment of the city to its former glory, several times a day.

How does the Times spew the absurd notion that Jerusalem is a novel idea to Israeli Jews?

Jerusalem is Important to All Jews, Not Jewish Extremists

The Times narrative continued that this once irrelevant city all of the sudden jumped into the minds of religious extremists after the Six Day War in 1967.

“The turning points in 1967 were two: the great victory, including the fast shift from fears of defeat before the war to euphoria and the feeling that everything was possible, and the emotional impact of occupying the Old City…. Images of Israeli soldiers praying at the Western Wall… became seared into Israel’s national consciousness.”
“Jerusalem became the center of a cultlike devotion that had not really existed previously…. This has now been fetishized to an extraordinary degree as hard-line religious nationalism,”
“The victory of the right-leaning party Likud in 1977… helped solidify this new emphasis on Jerusalem as integral to Israel’s identity. Religious settlers became more prominent in political life in Israel,”
“As part of this shift, Jerusalem’s symbolic importance intensified,”

It is unquestionably true that many religious Jews flocked to Jerusalem. They have been doing so for thousands of years because it is the most holy city in Judaism. They are not “right-leaning” or “religious settlers.” They are people who came to live in their holiest city.

As further evidence of the long-standing importance of Jerusalem to the entire country – even the “secular European socialists” that the article highlighted – was Israel’s adoption of a particular menorah as its national emblem in 1949: the one that was pictured in the Arch of Titus in Rome. That menorah symbolized the ransacking and destruction of the Second Jewish Temple in Jerusalem 2000 years earlier. The deliberate selection of that menorah as the symbol of the Jewish State of Israel was to show that the Jews had returned from the diaspora, to its sacred land and holiest city, Jerusalem.

Today, the entire Jewish people continue to be engaged about Jerusalem. The current controversy surrounding creating a pluralistic place for prayer at the Western Wall is because of the strong interest of Reform and Conservative Jews for Jerusalem. The notion that the city is only important to “cultlike… religious settlers” is absurd.

Jews Belong in Eastern Jerusalem

The Times continued its horrific background by concluding that Jews have no rights to be in the eastern part of the city:

“Palestinians say that Jewish settlers have encroached on East Jerusalem,”
“‘The entire international community has been in accord that Israeli annexation and settlement of East Jerusalem since 1967 is illegal, and refuses to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital,'”

As the Times never explained to readers that all of the Jews were evicted by the Jordanians in 1949, it made their appearance in the eastern half of the city seem strange and foreign. It is not. Jews returned to parts of their holiest city where they lived for centuries.

The Times also did not give background to the international laws of 1920 (San Remo) and 1922 (Mandate of Palestine), which both clearly and explicitly stated that Jews could live throughout Palestine – including the Old City of Jerusalem – and that no person could be excluded from living anywhere in the land due to religious beliefs.

No matter. The paper chose to quote anti-Zionists. It is surprising that it did not state that Zionism is a form of Racism.

Oh, and for those keeping score that Israel limits Arabs in Jerusalem, look at the statistics above again. Under the British from 1922 to 1948, the number of Jews and Arabs BOTH went up by three times. From 1967 to 1995, the number of Arabs in Jerusalem under Israeli rule tripled again, while the number of Jews only went up by 2.5 times. How does the Times keep giving people the impression that Jews overran the Arabs during British rule (when both groups grew by the same percentage) and that Israel has been forcing out the Arabs from Jerusalem (even though the growth of Arab residents surpasses Jews!)

As the world waited for the United States to recognize the reality that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, the New York Times fed its readers anti-Zionist red meat. It crafted an article that Jews never much cared for the Arab city of Jerusalem until 50 years ago, and that the only Jews who really care about it now are religious fanatics. The masters of #FakeNews are trying their best to instigate a jihad.

Related First.One.Through articles:

750 Years of Continuous Jewish Jerusalem

The Anger from the Zionist Center

The Palestinian’s Three Denials

The Arguments over Jerusalem

The Custodianship of a Child and Jerusalem

Obama’s “Palestinian Land”

Nicholas Kristof’s “Arab Land”

Arabs in Jerusalem

Music video: The Anthem of Israel is Jerusalem

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

In Inversion, New York Times Admits “The Truth is Hard to Find”

Posted on April 23, 2017 by First.One.Through

Ever since politics introduced the concept of “Alternative Facts” and “Fake News” some months ago, the mainstream media has been fighting back that it is the real authority on the truth. The New York Times has sought to portray itself as the media source that uncovers the truth and has pushed the tagline of “the Truth is Hard to Find,” as it features its journalists in large promotional advertisements.

Double page advertisement in The New York Times about Jodi Ruduren
April 23, 2017

On April 23, 2017, the Times featured an enormous spread to convey how its Middle East reporter, Jodi Roduren, went deep into a hidden Hamas tunnel to tell a story behind the Gaza War in 2014. The caption in the advertisement read: “Forty-six feet underground, Jodi Rudoren, Jerusalem bureau chief, ventured into a secret tunnel used by Hamas insurgents to launch surprise attacks from Gaza into Israel.”

If only the New York Times actually reported such events during the war in 2014.

As detailed in “The New York Times’ Buried Pictures” about Rudoren’s story when it was written on July 28, 2014, Rudoren mischaracterized the entirety of the story about the terror tunnels:

It took three weeks for the NYT to post a single picture of the terror tunnels, even though they were the root cause of the war;
On the day that the paper finally showed a picture of the tunnels, it only placed a small black-and-white photograph on page A6, even while it posted a large color picture on the front page of Palestinians mourning, and a large black-and-white picture of Palestinians mourning above the picture of the tunnel;
Rudoren’s article made light of Israeli concerns about the tunnels, referring to the Israeli invitation to tour the tunnels as a “propaganda push,” rather than a chance to report on the nature of the battle from a first-hand encounter;
Roduren wrote that “Israelis exchange nightmare scenarios that are the stuff of action movies” about the tunnels, as if the threat was simply imagined.
Compare Rudoren’s late and under-emphasized report during the 2014 war, with the front page story on May 21, 2016 that Palestinian Arabs are scared about the tunnels (because Israel will destroy them).

Yet the Times describes itself as the discoverer of “truth,” even while it misleads readers.

Consider two stories on the next day, July 30, 2014, when the Times repeatedly blamed Israel for bombing a power plant even though there was no proof that it was not done by Hamas, either intentionally or not. The two articles also did not mention the dozens of rockets that Hamas fired into Israel, nor that Hamas refused to accept a ceasefire.

Just two days before Rudoren’s article about the Hamas tunnels, she wrote that anti-Israel riots in Europe had an “anti-Semitic tinge,” belittling the thousands of people storming streets in Paris yelling “Hitler was right” and attacking Jews and Jewish stores.

Roduren was a key player in the New York Times’ biased and terrible coverage of Israel:

In October 2012, Roduren wrote an article about “honor killings” in Gaza and the West Bank. Rather than point the finger squarely at the disgraceful Islamic practice performed by Palestinian Arabs on their own family members, Rudoren repeatedly blamed Israel. How? Read the fact-altering “news” for yourself.
Rudoren’s May 2014 coverage of the Pope’s visit to Israel was disgraceful in repeatedly stretching facts to fit a narrative that Palestinian Arabs are victims of racist Israeli policies
On July 6, 2014, Rudoren wrote about the Jerusalem neighborhood of Shuafat, making it sound like an ancient Arab neighborhood rather than an ancient Jewish neighborhood
In September 2014, when Palestinian Arabs were firebombing Jewish homes and a gas station in an attempt to create a large explosion, Roduren minimized the riots and that Israeli soldiers over-reacted to the Arabs’ “crude gestures toward Israeli soldiers.”
Her front page article on March 13, 2015, “As Israeli Settlements Take Root, So Do Complications,” repeated Palestinian propaganda as fact when she claimed that a few thousand Jews living in the West Bank threatened the “viability” of a Palestinian State.

The examples of Roduren’s anti-Israel bias and deliberate misrepresentation of the facts were present in almost every article that she wrote for the Times. Her bias was so intense, that when Foreign Press Association wrote about threats its journalists received from Hamas about its reporting on the war, Roduren took to Twitter to defend Hamas. Yes, that same anti-Semitic terrorist group that dug terror tunnels into Israel.

On September 17, 1993, A.M. Rosenthal wrote an op-ed for the New York Times about the Oslo Accords. He concluded with a prescient comment about the news media confusing their biased narrative and hope for the future with actual facts: “[There] is the tendency to confuse hope for the future with present reality….Pray for peace but add another prayer for truth upon which it depends.”

The New York Times may write that the “Truth is Hard to Find.” In truth, for the liberal paper, the facts are difficult to print.

Related First.One.Through articles:

New York Times Lies about the Gentleness of Zionism

New York Times’ Tales of Israeli Messianic War-Mongering

The New York Times Refuses to Label Hamas a Terrorist Group

Educating the New York Times: Hamas is the Muslim Brotherhood

The New York Times Thinks that the Jews from Arab Countries Simply “Immigrated”

Every Picture Tells a Story: Goodbye Peres

Every Picture Tells a Story: Arab Injuries over Jewish Deaths

Every Picture Tells a Story- Whitewashing the World (except Israel)

Every Picture Tells a Story: The Invisible Murdered Israelis

Every Picture Tells A Story: Only Palestinians are Victims

Social Media’s “Fake News” and Mainstream Media’s Half-Truths

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis

Israel Plans to Build in Israeli Territory. It’s News

Posted on March 31, 2017 by First.One.Through

On March 30, 2017, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced plans for a new town in Area C of Judea and Samaria for the residents of the demolished settlement of Amona. The new US Trump administration gave its tacit approval for the homes for the Israeli families.

U.S. President Donald Trump (R) laughs with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at a joint news conference at the White House in Washington, U.S., February 15, 2017. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

The move was seen by many as very controversial, as it came just a few months after the UN Security Council passed UNSC Resolution 2334 that deemed Israeli homes east of the Green Line (EGL) as having no legal validity. The development was also the first one announced by Israel since it signed the Oslo Accords with the Palestinian Authority in 1993.

But the Oslo Accord of 1993 and the subsequent Oslo II signed in 1995 made clear that the majority of EGL – known as Area C – was under complete Israeli civilian and military control: it was Israeli Territory. So even though the Israeli government did not announce any new Israeli developments, there was no question as to the administrative authority of the Israeli government to do so.

These facts were not found in the mainstream media.

CNN’s story “Israel approves construction of first new settlement in more than 20 years,” included the following statements:

“Israel’s Security Cabinet on Thursday unanimously approved the construction of a new settlement in the West Bank, according to a message from the Prime Minister’s office, marking the state’s first new settlement in Palestinian territory in more than 20 years.” only calling the region “West Bank” and not including the Israeli name “Judea and Samaria” or neutral nomenclature like EGL. It further misstated that the town was in Palestinian administered land, not Israeli.
“The new settlement, which will be constructed north of the Palestinian city of Ramallah,” anchors the location to a “Palestinian city” and not the Israeli town of Shiloh.
It included this quote from a Palestinian Arab, but quoted no Israelis in the article: “”Israel’s policies remain unchanged as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his extremist, racist coalition government continue to persist with their systematic policies of settler colonialism, apartheid and ethnic cleansing, showing a total and blatant disregard for Palestinian human rights, independence and dignity,” Ashrawi said in a statement.” Nice propaganda language to promote.
“The United Nations Security Council passed a resolution in December condemning Israeli settlements constructed in the West Bank and East Jerusalem as illegal. These territories, occupied by the Israeli military since 1967, are where Palestinians plan to create their future state.” No education to readers that EGL was taken from JORDAN in a DEFENSIVE WAR and that the new town is located in the Israeli Territory of Area C where Israel has civilian and military rule as agreed by the Palestinian Authority.

Reuters had a story called “Israeli cabinet approves first West Bank settlement in 20 years.” Sound familiar? The article stated:

“Israel’s security cabinet on Thursday approved the building of the first new settlement in the occupied West Bank in two decades, even as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu negotiates with Washington on a possible curb on settlement activity.” Adding the word “occupied” gave the deliberate misrepresentation that the land was Palestinian, and not Israeli territory.
Like CNN, Reuters also chose to quote Hanan Ashrawi “”Today’s announcement once again proves that Israel is more committed to appeasing its illegal settler population than to abiding by the requirements for stability and a just peace,” said Hanan Ashrawi, an executive committee member of the Palestine Liberation Organization,” but it did also quoted Netanyahu: “I made a promise that we would establish a new settlement … We will keep it today.” Further, Reuters omitted the highly offensive vitriol spewed by Ashrawi.
Reuters also added this rationale: “Such settlements, in territory that Israel captured in the 1967 Middle East war, are deemed illegal by most of the world. Israel cites biblical, historical and political links to the land, as well as security interests, to defend its actions.” It added a few reasons why Israel has “links” to the land, but never mentioned international law of 1920 and 1922 permitting Jews to live in the area, nor political AGREEMENTS signed with the Palestinian Authority.

The Wall Street Journal’s article titled “Netanyahu Pushes New West Bank Settlement,” tied the decision to Netanyahu, not the Israeli cabinet, and did not include any time period relaying how “new” this settlement was.

At least until the opening sentence of the story. “Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Thursday proposed the first new settlement in decades,” so readers got the history that this was a break from recent norms.
The WSJ spent the first eight paragraphs of the story giving some background on the approval process of the new town as well as the tacit approval of the White House to move forward with the project. Only at the ninth paragraph did the paper discuss the controversy around the development, before it quoted Ashrawi. This compared to CNN and Reuters which quoted Ashrawi much earlier in the fourth paragraph to set the tone of the article.

There was not a single article in any major media that mentioned the reality that the new development will be in Israeli administered territory. Of the major media, CNN was the most offensive, airing hateful Palestinian Arab propaganda and actually calling the land “Palestinian Territory.”

Is Trump wrong about CNN being #FakeNews?

Related First.One.Through articles:

Heritage, Property and Sovereignty in the Holy Land

“Settlements” Crossing the Line

CNN’s Embrace of Hamas

Names and Narrative: CNN’s Temple Mount/ Al Aqsa Complex Inversion

Stopping the Purveyors of Hateful Propaganda

A “Viable” Palestinian State

Subscribe YouTube channel: FirstOneThrough

Join Facebook group: FirstOne Through Israel Analysis