The Double Standard: Media Reactions to Zionist Terror, as conspicuous from the subheading, is an academic investigation into media’s reactions to the acts of terrorism perpetrated by Zionist forces over the years. For an in-depth and unwavering analysis of the media-narrative, the authors, Jody McIntyre and Mohammed Hijab, have rooted their study on the coverage of two incidents:
- King David Hotel Bombing of 1946 by Irgun (a pre-state predecessor to IDF), and
- An IDF airstrike at Jabalia refugee camp in Gaza on 31st Oct 2023
Prima facie, both these acts are acts of terrorism. Considering the loss of life – 91 killed and 41 injured in the former incident as compared to casualties in the latter i.e. 126 killed (including 64 children) and 280 injured – the latter appears to be more heinous and tragic. Yet in the British, Arab, and Jewish media, the former was described as a terrorist attack whereas the latter wasn’t. The central question that the authors explore is why.
The reader comes to know that IDF (i.e. Israeli Defence Forces) was formed from the remnants of three terrorist organisations namely Haganah, Irgun and Lehi. To be very clear at the outset, these organisations were regarded as terrorists not by some Palestinian or Arab propaganda machine but by the British government itself.
The reader wonders that with such a terroristic lineage in the past, and genocidal intent and performance showcased in the present, the IDF has christened (no pun intended) itself rather ‘humbly’, it should have been named ITF in which T would manifest their truth i.e. Terrorism.
The authors have not only underscored this truth of IDF but have also questioned the legitimacy of the very political entity named Israel. They stress over the unquestionable terroristic past of the Israeli political leaders. For example, two times Prime Minister of Israel Menachem Begin was a leader of Irgun, later he founded Likud to which belongs Netanyahu. Another Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir was a Lehi leader, etc. Hence, the authors deduce that by every definition Israel is a terrorist political entity. They wonder why it’s not regarded as such and ask some uncomfortable questions: “Is it the case that the colour of the victims’ skin sets the definition? Or is judgement simply determined by whether the perpetrator supports Western interests or not?”
The compact 80 pages study is divided into four parts. Part one introduces the theme and questions of the study. It builds a case about Zionist violence as a building block of Israel. Plan Dalet especially the massacre of Deir Yassin is explored in detail. Two brutal murders, of a child and paramedic, followed by some erroneous rather shameless justifications are highlighted. Additionally, the text touches upon the apartheid practices of Israel (for e.g. discriminatory laws, such as the Law of Return and the Absentee Property Law, etc.) besides Israel’s collaboration with apartheid South Africa. In short, the authors establish that the Israeli political entity is an apartheid, oppressive and terrorist regime.
Part two deals with media responses to the 1946 King David Hotel Bombing.The heinous attacks have been described as an equivalent to the Twin Towers attacks for USA. It has been accentuated that over the years Israeli leaders have justified the attacks to the extent that Netanyahu has unveiled a plaque commemorating the incident without condemning the perpetrators. After establishing this background, responses of British media (The Manchester Guardian, The Daily Mail, and Daily Mirror); Palestinian media (Filastin, Al-Ittihad, and Al-Difa); and Jewish media (The Palestine Post, Al ha-mishmar, and Ha’aretz) have been recorded and analysed. The authors have noted that in the British media despite the characterisation of the attacks as an “outrage” and even as an act of “Jewish terrorism”, an undercurrent of sympathy towards the motives of the Jewish resistance movement can be traced. The Palestinian media condemned the “heinous Jewish crime” in strongest terms. They also attributed Zionist terror to British occupation rather than emphasising Jewish criminality. The Jewish media strongly condemned the Irgun’s actions, labelling them a “reckless fascist gang”, it also highlighted global reactions, including British condemnation and concerns about the impact on world sympathy for Zionism.
Part three deals with media responses to the Jabalia Refugee Camp Bombing of October 31st, 2023.A context has been given of Israel’s recent bombardment of Gaza and the attacks have been described as “bloodiest in history”. Genocidal rhetoric from Israeli officials has been underscored including suggestions of using nuclear bombs on Gaza. A brief history and description of Jabalia Camp is followed by the analysis of media responses to the attack that comprised six 2000-pound bombs dropped on Jabalia camp. Following the pattern of the preceding chapter, responses of British media (The Guardian, Daily Mail, and Daily Mirror); Palestinian and Arab media (Al-Jazeera, and Al-Quds); and Jewish media (The Jerusalem Post, The Times of Israel, and Ha’aretz) have been recorded and analysed.
The authors have noted that Israeli version of the events gets prominence in British media with minimal to no pushback on Israeli claims. They especially underline the fact that the term “act of terror” is not explicitly used in describing the Jabalia camp bombing in comparison with the King David Hotel bombing, where the term “terrorist” was applied. Even at risk of prolonging this write-up, I am giving in to the temptation of showcasing a glimpse of their meticulous analysis. For the sake of brevity, I will restrict myself to their assessment of The Guardian’s coverage. Authors have underscored the following points:
- While covering the King David bombing The Guardianrecognises the attack as “brutal” but warns against “vicious cycle” of repression of the Jews that would “only breed further terrorism”. These attacks, for The Guardian, “stress the need for speed” in bringing a political solution. The authors have emphasised that, “Palestinians are never afforded such platitudes in the modern context, with any acts of resistance often completely stripped of their political context.” (p. 24)
- In the context of Jabalia Camp bombing, the authors have called out the “dissociative amnesia” of The Guardian in the following words, “Palestinian deaths have increasingly been reduced to a murder mystery in the Western media, with ‘Dozens killed’ written in the passive tone. Rather than stating that the Israeli airstrikes killed these people, it is as if the relation between the two was merely incidental.” (p. 41)
[Read more on radiancenews.com]
[The writer is Director In-Charge, Indian Institute of Islamic Studies and Research]