Racist Arab-Islamic targeting Haredi town that avoids draft and from ascending Temple Mount / Abu Mazen's equating visiting holy site to massacring, rewriting current history too / AP provides Palestinianism propaganda

Submitted by Martin (United States), Apr 10, 2022 at 12:31

The Assocuared Press [https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2022-04-08/israeli-forces-kill-alleged-palestinian-attacker-tel-aviv-bar], while innocent Israeli civilians bleed from Arab Palestinian terrorist, it doesn't miss a moment from eagerly providing us the "Palestinianism", you know, the "occupation" cloak for all heinous crimes. Yet, it still calls the murderer a "suspect." Contradiction and bias, side by side.

It elaborates on 1967 war about East Jerusalem, as if Tel Aviv is anywhere near there. And what do those Haredim in Bnei Brak (targeted by Fatah on Mar 29 2022) that refuse to serve in the IDF have to do with all that "politics"?

BTW, Abbas on 04/07/22 equated ascending the Temple Mount with slaughter of civilian Israelis. He also tried in a way to rewrite current history, as if visitors on Temple Mount was before the Arab Palestinian Fatah 03/29/22 murderous attack targeting Bnei Brak which not only, it is, in general, avoiding draft but avoids Temple Mount too. The very same Abbas who rewrites Holocaust history.

The AP notes the line: "55 years of occoation," as if there weren't massacres since the 1920s by the Arab Muslims there. What is the difference between the Mufti's gangs and all different terror groups titles today? Fedayeen in the 1950s, PLO since 1964, then, Fatah, Hamas, PIJ, Hezbollah, AL Aqsa martyrs, and if I miss any other titles. Are there any less genocidal - "itbakh Al yahud"? Were these, are these Arabs less racist, these Islamist less bigots?

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".