When Fire Falls on the Truth: The Boulder Attack and the Left’s Warped Silence on Antisemitism

On May 31, 2025, a pro-Israel rally in Boulder, Colorado—meant to raise awareness about Israeli hostages taken by Hamas—turned into a living nightmare. As children stood with posters and elderly survivors held signs for peace, Mohamed Sabry Soliman launched a violent assault using Molotov cocktails and a homemade flamethrower [AP News]. Eight people were injured. One was a Holocaust survivor. And according to federal investigators, Soliman showed no remorse—stating bluntly he had “no regrets” and would do it again [Washington Post].

This wasn’t random violence. It was an ideological hate crime, openly carried out against Jews in broad daylight, motivated by political hatred and antisemitism.

And yet, as this horrifying event gripped the Jewish community and drew condemnation from federal law enforcement, mainstream liberal media outlets responded with an eerie, calculated restraint. Where were the bold headlines? Where was the moral outrage?

Where was the truth?

The Media's Soft-Gloved Treatment of a Firebombing

In a just society, when violence targets a minority group based on religion or ethnicity, the press responds with clarity. But what we got from many mainstream outlets was strategic ambiguity—a masterclass in euphemism designed to suppress the ideological motive behind the attack.

Take The Guardian, for example. Their headline?

“How 'a man with a blow torch' turned a rally in Colorado into a scene of horror” [Guardian]

A blow torch? The man wasn’t making crème brûlée. He was trying to burn Jews alive. But framing him as merely "a man with a blow torch" minimizes the gravity of the act and removes any mention of antisemitism or ideology from the headline.

NPR chose to bury the attack in a newsletter block, under the vague teaser:

“Who is the Colorado attack suspect?”—paired alongside a story about Ukraine’s stolen children [NPR].

And AP News ran with this:

“Attack at demonstration calling for Israeli hostages’ release was first where group faced violence” [AP].

Notice the construction: the demonstration “faced violence.” Not people. Not Jews. Not victims. A demonstration. As if this were a weather event, not an act of politically motivated hate.

This kind of coverage isn’t journalism. It’s narrative laundering—a deliberate effort to soften, obscure, and neutralize the ideological component of the crime because it came from the wrong side of the political spectrum.

The Progressive Double Standard on Hate

Now imagine, for a moment, that the roles were reversed. Imagine a white Christian man had attacked a Muslim rally with firebombs. Or targeted a Pride parade. What would the headlines have said?

They’d scream:
“HATE-FUELED TERROR”
“WHITE SUPREMACIST VIOLENCE”
“EXTREMIST ATTACK ON MARGINALIZED GROUP”

And they would’ve been right to do so.

But when the attacker is a Muslim immigrant who expresses anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian political motives—and the victims are Jews—the language becomes suddenly hesitant. Measured. Avoidant. The framing shifts from moral clarity to moral fog.

Why? Because the press has a victim hierarchy, and in the progressive worldview, Jews—particularly Zionist Jews—are often portrayed as oppressors, not victims. Despite the fact that antisemitism remains one of the most prevalent and violent forms of hate in America today, it’s frequently dismissed when it clashes with dominant leftist narratives [ADL Report].

This is how antisemitism on the Left survives—by being ignored by the very institutions that claim to fight bigotry.

Ideological Hatred Disguised as Activism

Let’s be clear: Soliman didn’t just “snap.” He reportedly planned this attack for over a year. According to FBI documents, he researched the protest, built incendiary devices, and set the fire deliberately at people—shouting anti-Israel rhetoric the entire time [Reuters].

This was premeditated, political, and targeted. That fits every legal and moral definition of terrorism and antisemitic hate.

But the Left is increasingly unable to distinguish between political protest and ideological violence, particularly when it comes from causes they sympathize with—like anti-Zionist movements. And that blind spot is not just intellectually dishonest—it’s deadly.

The rhetoric that dehumanizes Jews as “colonizers,” or chants “From the river to the sea,” creates fertile soil for attacks like Boulder. And when the media refuses to report it honestly, it gives radicals the cover they crave.

The Real Cost of Media Cowardice

Words shape perception. And perception shapes policy, empathy, and public awareness.

When journalists refuse to say “antisemitism,” they don’t just fail the victims—they fail the nation. They numb the public to injustice. They allow repeat offenses to go unchecked. They send the message that some forms of hate are more excusable than others.

This isn’t just about headlines. It’s about cultural decay. The refusal to name evil when it wears the colors of the Left is how societies slide from principled pluralism into tribal favoritism.

Conclusion: Courage in Clarity

The Boulder firebombing was a hate crime. It was antisemitic. It was ideological. And it should’ve been reported that way, loudly and unapologetically.

But instead of speaking truth to power, the legacy media chose to protect its preferred narrative—even at the expense of truth, justice, and public trust.

We won’t do the same.

At Conservative Compass, we believe no form of bigotry should be protected by political favoritism. Whether hate comes from the far-Right, far-Left, or anyone in between—it must be named, condemned, and stopped.

Because when the truth is buried under bias, violence is sure to rise again.

#ConservativeCompass #BoulderAttack #JewishLivesMatter #StopAntisemitism #MediaBias #CallItWhatItIs #NarrativeControl #TruthMatters #MoralClarity #ExposeTheBias