osewalrus

That story going around that the Chief Rabbi of Israel said the place in Pittsburgh wasn't a "synagogue" because it wasn't Orthodox? Turns out to be a total lie. It took some amazing editing for Haaretz to get the story and headline it wanted.

First, here is the original interview in Hebrew.
https://www.makorrishon.co.il/news/87083/

For the benefit of those who do not read Hebrew, here is a story from Forward that provides the necessary translation.
https://forward.com/…/israel-chief-rabbi-didnt-dismiss-con…/

For those who do not click through, the actual dialog was (and this is me doing a summary translation to try to express things idiomatically for English readers).

Rabbi Lau: Let us be clear about one essential thing, the murder of any Jew anywhere in the world is a terrible tragedy that impacts all of us everywhere.

Text of story: Rabbi Lau *strongly rejects* any allegations that some in the Charedi community are saying this is somehow related to the fact that they were conservative Jews. [The implication being that Charedim would regard this as Divine punishment of some kind.]

Rabbi Lau: "How could anyone say that! What possible connection could there be (between them being conservative and what happened)?! The murderer clearly chose them because they were Jews. I have not heard anyone say anything about this or ask such a question. They were murdered because they were Jews. Who difference does it make what *synagogue* they pray in or what prayer book they read from?

Interviewer: But some people in the Charedi community won't use the term Synagogue. They call it a cultural center.

Rabbi Lau: I am well aware what some people write. Look, I deal with the media all the time. I know what gets written and sometimes I like it and sometimes I don't. I go back to them and say 'do not stir up bad feelings among fellow Jews!' I have very strong disagreements with them (conservative Jews) about the nature of Judaism and the future of Judaism. But so what? Because we have disagreements they are no longer Jews?

Interviewer: So then it is a synagogue?

Rabbi Lau: This murderer came to this place precisely because he knew it was a place of Jewish worship with all the symbols of Jewish worship. A place with torah scrolls, of Jews praying in their prayer shawls, where people come to draw closer to God. It was for this very reason that the murderer chose to commit the murder there, and in no other place.

So how did Haaretz transform this into a slur? Because, despite the fact that Rabbi Lau said earlier that it was a synagogue ("who cares what synagogue they attend") and despite his passionate description designed to emphasize the common bonds of worship and drawing close to God, he didn't technically say "yes" when asked "So it is a synagogue." True, any normal, fair reading of what Rabbi Lau actually said is stronger than a simple affirmative -- especially in context of his entire remarks.

Those unfamiliar with Israel and Haaretz, however, are unaware that Haaretz has An Agenda. Haaretz is hard left and profoundly anti-religious. Now it is perfectly fine to have an agenda. But advocacy journalism does not mean deliberately misconstruing someone's words to make them come out the complete opposite of what they mean -- especially for the purpose of sowing hatred and mistrust when the person you are misrepresenting is trying to bring people together.

This is what made me suspicious when I saw the story sourced to Haaretz. So I wanted to find the original interview myself before saying anything, because I *knew* Haaretz might pull crap like that.

But, as the forward story points out, the real blame for spreading this extremely painful lie belongs to the news sources that did not bother to double check the story. They simply retweeted Haaretz. Particularly at a time like this, it is important to look skeptically on stories that are deliberately divisive