Why they rewrite the intifada
The wave of Palestinian Arab violence that raged from December 1987 to the autumn of 1993—the intifada today’s campus extremists idolize—featured constant murderous bombings, shootings and stabbings.The Trump anti-jihad ripple effect
Perhaps a few examples will suffice to refresh the memory of an international community that always seems to be afflicted with amnesia when Jewish victims are involved:
• In 1988, Palestinian terrorists threw hand grenades inside a Haifa mall, wounding 25. Near Beersheva, intifadists hijacked a bus full of Israeli women traveling to work and murdered three of them. They also murdered an Israeli teenager in a Jerusalem park and hid bombs in loaves of bread in a Jerusalem supermarket; three children were injured.
• In 1989, an intifada terrorist steered an Israeli bus into a ravine, killing 14 passengers (including U.S. citizen Rita Levine) and wounding 27 (five of them Americans). Also that year, Palestinian Arabs bombed a Tel Aviv market, injuring four, and went on a stabbing rampage in a Jerusalem shopping area, murdering two and wounding three. On Purim day in Tel Aviv, an Arab terrorist stabbed two Israelis to death with a commando knife and severely wounded a third. One of the victims was an elderly scientist who had been delivering holiday treats to the poor.
• In 1990, intifada terrorists carried out bomb attacks in a Jerusalem marketplace (one dead, nine wounded), the Tel Aviv beachfront (one dead, 20 wounded) and the Ein Gedi springs (four wounded). In Jerusalem, a Palestinian Arab terrorist stabbed three Israelis to death. Another knife-wielding terrorist murdered an Israeli and wounded three more on a Tel Aviv bus.
• In 1991, intifadists stabbed and wounded two Israelis in Jerusalem; bombed a Beersheva market, injuring two shoppers; and ambushed a bus north of Jerusalem, killing two and wounding six (five of them children). Palestinian Arab terrorist atrocities in 1992 included the murder of 15-year-old Helena Rapp in Bat Yam, the kidnapping and murder of Nissim Toledano and a stabbing rampage in Jaffa (two murdered, 19 injured).
• The bloodshed continued in 1993 with stabbing attacks in Tel Aviv that left one dead and four wounded in one instance, and two dead and seven wounded in another. There was also a car bombing at the Mehola Junction that killed one person and injured 21; and the murder of 11-year-old Chava Wechsberg in an attack on an Israeli automobile near Karmei Tzur.
And those are just a few examples from each of those years.
During the first four years of the intifada, there were some 600 bombing or shooting attacks on Israelis, and another 100 hand-grenade attacks, not to mention more than 3,600 attempts to burn Israelis to death with Molotov cocktails. Altogether, 27 Israelis were murdered and 3,000-plus wounded during that period. Twenty-five more were murdered in 1992 and 65 in 1993.
Far from being a spontaneous uprising—as Palestinian advocates portray it—the intifada was carefully orchestrated. A PLO department called the Unified Leadership of the Intifada issued daily instructions on how much violence should be used and against whom.
So the question is: Why do The New York Times and other media outlets never explain what took place during this time period that the campus radicals are so loudly applauding? Why do they deliberately downplay the extent of the Palestinian Arab violence?
The answer is that it’s all politics, of course. Major media outlets sympathize with the Palestinian Arab cause and its campus cheerleaders. Acknowledging the extent of Palestinian atrocities makes their cause look bad.
That’s why that Times Sunday Magazine article emphasized the “boycotts” and rock-throwing, and omitted the bombings and shootings and hijackings. That’s also why The Washington Post and CNN never mention that the rocks can be fatal—and that 16 Israelis have been murdered by Arab rock-throwers.
That, in short, is why they rewrite the intifada. Because telling the truth would make readers stop and ask: Does it really make sense to give these intifadists a sovereign state in Israel’s backyard?
Europe is grappling with significant challenges as antisemitism rises and radical Islamist ideologies gain traction. In countries like France, Germany and the United Kingdom, Jewish communities increasingly face violent attacks and growing hostility. The impact of radical Islam extends far beyond antisemitism. Muslim communities in major Western European cities struggle with assimilation and too often advocate for the adoption of Islamic laws and cultural practices that conflict with the values of their host societies. This dynamic has contributed to expanding “no-go zones” where local law enforcement faces significant challenges in maintaining control. These zones further isolate young Muslims, perpetuating a vicious cycle of alienation and radicalization. High-profile incidents like the Paris riots, the Brussels bombings and the London Bridge attack highlight the need for action.The Lower East Side anti-Jewish riot that changed the way Jews do politics
Israel is the West’s first line of defense against radical Islam, so Trump’s unequivocal support for Israel further demonstrates his commitment to preserving Western culture. Key achievements in his support of Israel include relocating the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, recognizing the Golan Heights as Israeli territory, and brokering the Abraham Accords, which normalized relations between Israel and several Arab nations. Trump is messaging his intent to enthusiastically continue supporting Israel in its defensive, justified, and, so far, very successful war against Iran and its proxies. These actions not only strengthen U.S.-Israel ties but also showcase a path towards regional stability through decisive leadership.
A transatlantic partnership, led by America and rooted in firm opposition to radical Islam and antisemitism, will reverse the gains made by extreme Islamists in the United States and abroad. It will also deny a quarter to young, impressionable Muslims who will no longer be emboldened by the West’s apparent capitulation to jihadists’ efforts. Trump’s policies emphasize rejecting jihadist ideologies while fostering integration and inclusion for Muslim communities willing to embrace democratic values. In recognition of this, many in the American Muslim community supported Trump for president. This balanced approach serves as an antidote to the progressive left’s tolerance of Islamist extremism, which has allowed these ideologies to gain a foothold. By prioritizing firm opposition to radical Islamism in all its forms alongside support for genuine inclusion, a united front can safeguard democratic principles while buying the West time to address the root causes of Islamic extremism.
The Trump anti-jihad effect offers a beacon of hope for a Western civilization under siege by radical Islam and antisemitism. Trump’s policies, grounded in moral clarity and decisive action, aim to dismantle these movements’ ideological and cultural threats. By resisting the progressive left’s pro-Islamist sentiment in America and countering unfettered immigration from radicalized regions of the world, Trump’s approach provides a blueprint for safeguarding the Judeo-Christian values that underpin Western society.
You might be forgiven for never having heard of the worst anti-Jewish riot in American history. It happened on the Lower East Side over a century ago and largely slipped from history. Jewish memory was overloaded with subsequent calamities, from Kishinev and Auschwitz to Pittsburgh and October 7.
But as Scott Seligman argues in his new book, “The Chief Rabbi’s Funeral,” the mob attack on July 30, 1902, that left 196 Jewish mourners beaten and bloodied, also left a legacy of Jewish political activism that remains a model for today. The attack on the funeral procession of Rabbi Jacob Joseph led a fractious Jewish community to organize, seeking justice for the victims and punishment for the perpetrators.
“The lesson of the 1902 riot is that when antisemitism crosses the line, and it morphs into violence and intimidation against Jews, then it needs to be punished, and our best response is to unify and to organize,” Seligman, a historian based in Washington, D.C., told me this week. “Which is what they did, using whatever political power and influence they had.”
Seligman and I last spoke in 2020, after the publication of his book “The Great Kosher Meat War of 1902,” which formed the germ of his latest book. Actually, he told me, an article I wrote about the earlier book, focusing on the rabbi whose funeral inspired the riot the same year, inspired Seligman to dig deeper into that part of the story.
Joseph was a Vilna Talmud scholar who was brought to New York in 1888 to serve as a sort of chief rabbi to the city’s teeming Jewish community (and rationalize its corrupt and unreliable kosher meat business). It turned out to be easier to merge all of New York’s boroughs into a single municipality than get the Jews to agree on a chief rabbi.
By 1895, Joseph was no longer being paid by the groups who brought him over, and his authority was recognized only by a handful of downtown Orthodox congregations. Before suffering a stroke in 1898, he worked as a hired kosher supervisor for some wholesale butchers.
When he died in 1902 at the age of 62, a penitent Lower East Side decided to give him in death the respect that had eluded him in life. Hundreds of thousands of mourners joined his funeral procession, which wound past neighborhoods in lower Manhattan before his body was put on a ferry for burial in Brooklyn.







.png)


















