More Thoughts on the New York Times
The New York Times exposed themselves. Not that their Jewish problem hadn't been exposed many times over the years, but this time it was to blatant to ignore or excuse unless you share the Times' Jewish problem.
Here is Caroline Glick reminding us of some of the other episodes in which the Times went full Protocols:
The article began with a description of the discussions on Israel conducted by the Democratic Party’s platform committee ahead of the 2016 Democratic National Convention. The committee was comprised of representatives of Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and representatives of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
The representatives chosen by Sanders…were all minorities, including James Zogby, the head of the Arab American Institute and a former senior official on Jesse Jackson’s 1984 and 1988 presidential campaigns; the Native American activist Deborah Parker; and Cornel West, the African-American professor and author then teaching at Union Theological Seminary.
The representatives selected by Clinton and the D.N.C. who spoke on the issue were all Jewish and included the retired congressman Howard Berman, who is now a lobbyist; Wendy Sherman, a former under secretary of state for political affairs; and Bonnie Schaefer, a Florida philanthropist and Democratic donor, who had made contributions to Clinton.
In other words, the anti-Israel representatives were all civil rights activists and members of legitimate victim groups. The pro-Israel representatives were all there because of their money.
And of course, because they are all-powerful, the Jews won.
The New York Times’ promotion of anti-Jewish libels in relation to Israel and more generally is all-encompassing. The Times reacted, for example, to Trump’s designation of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a terrorist organization by suggesting that he move could lead the U.S. to designate Israeli intelligence agencies as terrorist organizations.
Why? Well, because they are Israeli. And Israelis are terrorists.
The Times used the recent death of an Israeli spymaster to regurgitate a long discredited accusation that Israel stole enriched uranium from the United States. As is its wont, the Times libeled Israel in bold and then published a correction in fine print.
Phyllis Chesler has her hand on the pulse of left wing anti-Semitism and has been trying to warn us for a long time.
Cartoons all across the Nazi world and all across the Islamic world feature Jews as dogs, rats, octopuses, spiders—all creepy crawling things that must be exterminated. And the New York Times simply had no idea that this was so. Do you really believe that? I don’t. Listen: The Paper of Record has normalized Jew-hatred as fatefully as the United Nations has. They are the running dogs (so to speak) of this rapidly escalating surge of attacks on those who are visibly Jewish—not only in Europe or in Israel—but right here in America, in our synagogues and on our streets. Alas, I laid it all out at the beginning of the 21st century, I wrote my little heart out, and kept doing so, only to be told that I was imagining danger where none exists—and by some of the very people who are now beginning to repeat my lines, including the one about anti-Zionism=anti-Semitism. My own editor attacked me for this one insight. And then the world had its way with me.
But the New York Times could not spread their malicious lies without the support of their readers. Jack Engelhard gives us a look into what Times' readers think about the cartoon:
Which explains Bret Stephens…embarrassed to be part of a newspaper that is still like this, still like it was when it hid the Holocaust in its back pages.
Stephens (himself no friend of Netanyahu) did not let the paper off the hook…and here is the disturbing part…the readers did.
Of the 500-plus letters-to-the editor responding to Stephens, by my count, 90 percent thought the cartoon was not despicable, not at all, but wholly appropriate. They thought the monstrous depictions of Netanyahu, Trump and the Star of David were… perfectly acceptable, and saw no reason for explanations and apologies.
Rather than applaud Stephens, these multitudes turned on Stephens for daring to depart (this one time) from the Progressive point of view, which is that Israel and Trump are always in the wrong and always to be cursed and damned. Many of these letters read like the op-eds that so frequently run in the paper.
At a glance at these letters, you thought you were reading distilled Tom Friedman or Stephens himself when he was having a bad day….or a typical anti-Israel day.
So many letters, and so much hostility, and so much prejudice, and all of it heaped on the world’s one and only Jewish State. You’d rather not wonder why.
Yes, the Times did publish an apology. And they are no longer buying cartoons from the syndication service from which they bought THAT cartoon. But, a few days after the imbroglio, they printed this cartoon:
Apologies be damned. The New York Times has taken a stand (against Jews) and as long as they think they're being subtle enough to be able to engage in denial of the problem, the hatred will continue to fly. And judging from the reactions mentioned in Jack Engelhard's article, they will continue to garner more reader support than condemnation.