The Inverted Blood Libel Against Palestinians: Weaponized Falsehoods and Distortions

What is Blood Libel?

Blood libel refers to the false and antisemitic accusation that Jewish people have historically murdered non-Jews, particularly Christian children, to use their blood in religious rituals. This myth, which has been thoroughly debunked, originated in medieval Europe and was employed to justify the persecution of Jewish communities.

A universal definition of blood libel, is a fabricated atrocity narrative used to justify persecution, dehumanization, and violence against marginalized groups. Historically, it referred to the false medieval claim that Jews murdered Christian children for ritual purposes, leading to mass killings and societal exclusion. However, blood libel is not confined to its original antisemitic context—it is a broader weapon of oppression, wielded against communities that are unprotected, denied due process, and misunderstood or disliked due to difference or prejudice.

Blood Libel Against Palestinians

Today, we see a chilling inverted parallel—one that targets Palestinians.

Regarding the claims of 40 beheaded babies and mass rapes following the October 7 attacks, reports indicate that these allegations were widely circulated but lacked verified evidence. Some accounts were later debunked or retracted, including testimonies from ZAKA volunteers that fueled skepticism about sexual violence claims. Fact-checking organizations have also scrutinized the beheaded babies narrative, and found them false.

If these false claims were deliberately spread to demonize Palestinians and justify the genocide, they could be considered a form of modern blood libel—a fabricated atrocity narrative used to incite hostility and rationalize aggression. The impact of such disinformation (intentionally spreading falsehoods) and misinformation (spreading false stories without verification) is profound, shaping public perception and influencing policy decisions.

Since the October 7 attacks, widely debunked reports have emerged, including fabricated claims of beheaded babies and mass rapes. Spread by Israeli officials and amplified by Western media, these narratives have been used to justify the relentless bombing of Gaza, even after evidence disproved their validity. The intent behind such false claims mirrors historical blood libel: to condemn and dehumanize an entire people, rationalize their suffering, and silence calls for accountability.

Moreover, accusing Palestinians, who are colonized and occupied, of antisemitism represents another layer of this blood libel. This accusation inverts the historical context of antisemitism, a term originally coined to describe prejudice against Jews, and applies it to a group that is itself subjected to systemic oppression. This rhetorical strategy not only distorts the meaning of antisemitism but also serves to delegitimize Palestinian resistance and critique of Israeli policies that are persecuting Palestinians, framing it as inherently hateful and thus justifying further repression. This misuse of the term is a modern form of blood libel, as it fabricates a narrative of Palestinian malevolence to rationalize their continued persecution and violence against them.

Historical Parallels and Hypothetical Actions

Suppose Greenblatt had been born a Christian in historical Europe, where blood libel against Jews was rampant. Given his actions today, what can we infer about his hypothetical actions against Jews in that era? The evidence suggests a troubling pattern. Greenblatt’s selective application of “blood libel” indicates a willingness to protect powerful narratives while ignoring or justifying violence against marginalized groups. In historical Europe, he might have amplified false accusations against Jews, leveraging his influence to incite hatred and justify persecution, much like he does today by framing Palestinian criticism as blood libel. This is not to say he would have initiated such narratives, but his lack of forceful condemnation and his strategic use of rhetoric suggest he would have been complicit in their perpetuation.

The aim of blood libel, historically and today, is not merely to silence thinking and reason but to put the brakes on society, turning hype into investigations that verify, clarify, and confirm, including granting the accused their due process and not holding an entire group guilty for the acts of its few members. Yet, the ADL, under Greenblatt’s leadership, has fought due process for Palestinians every step of the way. How can one be against blood libel while simultaneously opposing due process, including the prosecution of figures like Benjamin Netanyahu and Yoav Gallant at the International Criminal Court (ICC)? This contradiction reveals a fundamental inconsistency: Greenblatt claims to oppose blood libel, but his actions suggest he is comfortable with its selective use as long as it serves his community’s interests. This is my hypothesis.

But blood libel was never just about Jews or propaganda—it was a precursor to mass persecution of communities who are unprotected, denied due process, and misunderstood or disliked out of prejudice. This weaponized narrative has resurfaced today, deployed against Palestinians to justify their oppression and erasure. When false narratives paint an oppressed group as monstrous, societies justify their extermination. Today, Palestinians face this exact reality:

• Over 65,000 civilians have been killed in Gaza—most of them women and children.
• Israeli engineered starvation is used as a weapon, with Israel cutting off food aid.
• Entire neighborhoods have been erased, leaving millions homeless.
• Ongoing military funding from the U.S. enables these atrocities.

Despite international condemnation, the U.S. continues to support Israel’s war machine, sending billions in arms while blocking meaningful efforts for a ceasefire.

“Never Again” Must Mean Never Again for All

The phrase “Never Again” emerged as a vow to prevent future genocides, particularly after the Holocaust. Yet, when Palestinians are subjected to mass slaughter, this principle is often dismissed. If blood libel was a heinous weapon against Jewish communities, why is its modern version tolerated when used against Palestinians?

Justice is not exclusive; if we condemn atrocity propaganda, we must condemn it universally. The same outrage reserved for historical blood libel must extend to the falsehoods used to justify the destruction of Gaza.

World Leaders Must Act: Stop Funding Genocide

World lawmakers have the power to alter the course of history. Ending unconditional support for Israel is not merely a policy shift—it is a moral imperative. Leaders must acknowledge their participation in enabling war crimes and genocide, and fulfill their duty to hold Israeli officials and military personnel accountable for their role in these atrocities.

The principle of “Never Again,” often invoked to prevent future genocides following the Holocaust, must be applied universally.

Political Agenda

When blood libel is allowed to serve political agendas, rather than being universally condemned, it perpetuates cycles of displacement, extermination, and moral hypocrisy. Recognizing and dismantling this dangerous rhetoric is crucial for justice, ensuring that propaganda never becomes the foundation for mass atrocities.

In progress…