Home » Once again , the NY Times lies about Israel

Comments

Once again , the <i>NY Times</i> lies about Israel — 25 Comments

  1. I reached the conclusion several years ago that the NYTimes is filled with fiction. And equally as pernicious, they don’t cover some legitimate news stories (Hunter Biden’s laptop comes to mind, and the story of the Philadelphia abortionist who was killing women — that never appeared in the NYTimes), so you cannot believe WHAT they publish, and you should keep in mind that they are avoiding other stories that should be in America’s paper of record. And the worst part is, many news people on small media outlets, particularly TV, look to the Times for guidance on what should be in their news reporting each day. It’s a sad situation!

  2. The last time I checked (ca. 2005), about 7% of the land area of Israel proper was privately owned, with half held by Jews and half held by Arabs. About 13% was owned by the Jewish National Fund. About 80% was state land, which could be leased to private parties. Much of that is in the Negev, where the land isn’t good for much but low intensity grazing, if that. As of now, about 15% of the surface area consists of arable land.

    Designated ‘cities’ in Israel tend to be quite densely settled and about 70% of the country’s population resides on 3% of the surface area.

  3. Oh, and as far as maps and photos in the Times, we’ve known for a long time that these are not reliable. Particularly when it comes to Israel — they clearly have a propaganda mission vis-à-vis Israel.

  4. Again, it’s run by AG Sulzberger, who fancied the cretinous race-hater Nikole Hannah-Jones was just the person to re-write the country’s history curricula.

  5. I despise, detest, and TOTALLY distrust the NYT (the WaPoo, too!) Also, the TV “news”.

  6. Laws, regulations and ethical standards are meaningless when blatant violation of them is without consequence. Nor does declining readership matter when billionaires fund the propaganda.

    The First Amendment’s protection of free speech is intended to protect disagreement, individual and consensual opinion and exposure of factual truth. It is not a license to lie.

  7. The Sulzberger family covered up the Shoah. may they all suffer covid encephalitis

  8. When I was an undergrad Oh So Many Years Ago I managed to stumble into the best work-study job I could imagine—Cataloguing and shelving current periodicals in the school Library. This included all the major newspapers from around the world. I was a voracious consumer of information and got paid by the hour. I read every major paper, because I truly (and rather naively) wanted to become as informed as possible. And the NYT was of course the gold standard.
    What struck me at the time (and in retrospect is obvious) is that I always felt like I was too stupid to fully appreciate or even understand what was written in the Times. “Why do they say it that way?””what does that mean?””What am I not getting this?”
    I assumed that it was just me not being smart enough to follow what the smart people were saying.
    And I am a credentialed smart person. Imagine how those less brilliant than I ? feel and respond when confronted with the NYT line.
    They have been a propaganda outfit for a very long time. And while the current crop of lefty shills may appear obvious to us, they fool an awful lot of people.

  9. @avi:

    “The Sulzberger family covered up the Shoah.”

    And the Holodomor.

    And the Great Leap Forward.

    Maybe the Armenians have a gripe with Pinch, too? I don’t know.

    “may they all suffer covid encephalitis”

    It would seem that the Quality of Mercy has taken several round trips through my morning coffee’s filter paper. Or are you preserving the Other Cheek for your Close Up? 🙂

  10. “they fool an awful lot of people.” Boatbuilder

    Indeed they have and do. That said, at this point those who still claim the mass media to be honest are either willfully blind or know the truth and in principle, embrace the meme that “the ends justify the means”. In either case, they are complicit in the enabling of tyranny. Because whenever the means used are dishonest, the resultant end is tyranny.

    “There is an international disease which feeds on the notion that if you have a cause to defend, you can use any means to further your cause, since the end justifies the means. As an international community, we must oppose this notion, whether it be in Canada, in the United States, or anywhere else. No cause justifies violence as long as the system provides for change by peaceful means.” Richard Nixon

  11. @ boatbuilder: “And I am a credentialed smart person.”

    Ah, that makes 17 of us (or is it 77 of us?!) 🙂

  12. The observations about the Times are buttressed by this post, citing historical precedent as well as current events.
    Teaser excerpt – the story begins with the debunking of the Russian bounties and Sicknick’s “murder”:
    https://nypost.com/2021/05/08/how-the-new-york-times-publishes-lies-to-serve-a-biased-narrative/

    Both stories were based on anonymous, unidentifiable sources, but had become deeply enmeshed in the public consciousness. Both confirmed the assumptions of the nation’s left-leaning media and academic elite, while damaging their political enemies.

    And both were driven by The New York Times, where malicious misreporting has been the practice for a century, argues journalist and media commentator Ashley Rindsberg.

    “My research churned up not mere errors or inaccuracies but whole-cloth falsehoods,” Rindsberg writes in “The Gray Lady Winked” (Midnight Oil), out now, which examines how the nation’s premier media outlet manipulates what we think is the news.

    The “fabrications and distortions” he found in the Times’ coverage of major stories from Hitler’s Germany and Stalin’s Russia to Vietnam and the Iraq War “were never the product of simple error,” Rindsberg contends.

    “Rather, they were the byproduct of a particular kind of system, a truth-producing machine” constructed to twist facts into a pattern of the Times’ own choosing, he says.

    Rindsberg argues that Times reporters have followed the same playbook since the 1920s.

    Star reporters cite fuzzily identified sources and make sweeping assertions to support a narrative aligned with the corporate whims, economic needs and political preferences of the patriarchal Ochs-Sulzberger family, which has helmed the operation since 1896, he writes. The chosen narrative, reinforced from multiple angles, is entrenched through a network of stories over time.

    He gives fascinating details about Hitler’s man in the Times Berlin bureau, and Duranty in the USSR; then talks about the alleged bounties paid by Russians on American soldiers in Afghanistan, which is now recognizable as the usual MO of the Times.

    “It was circular logic: We know that Trump is colluding with the Russians, therefore he doesn’t do anything about the bounties,” Rindsberg said. “And why doesn’t Trump do anything about the bounties? Because we know he’s colluding with the Russians.”

    Some of the paper’s top prize-winning reporters participated in follow-up stories that hammered on the theme for months, despite National Security Agency objections.

    The damage wrought by such powerful yet false symbolism is profound, Rindsberg concludes.

    “These narratives are interlocking,” Rindsberg said. “They have different nodes that connect to each other and strengthen each other in a network effect.”

    Which is why the Vanity Fair piece on the Lab Leak kept throwing out “it’s all Trump’s fault.”

    “Maybe you can knock down one piece of the story, but it doesn’t affect the bigger false narrative, because the network is so robust.”

    And not even a retraction will dislodge it from our minds.

    “We already believe Sicknick was battered to death, because we were told that for a month every single day,” Rindsberg said.

    “And when the story turns out to be false, The New York Times does not do accountability,” he said. “It’s quiet little adjustments — updates to the Web pages, maybe run a small correction or an editor’s letter somewhere.”

    After at least 30 Times stories and columns linked Brian Sicknick’s death to the actions of the Jan. 6 rioters, news that the medical examiner had punctured the narrative ran on page A12.

    “Because they’re protecting the thing that is most valuable to them, their reputation,” Rindsberg said. “And doing it at the expense of the truth.”

    Some reputation.

  13. This Constant Trump Blaming is a kind of weird inversion of the way that back during the Cultural Revolution, you couldn’t open an exhibition or pen an introduction to a book on silkworm breeding or publish a scientific paper without beginning with a supposedly relevant, exhorting/approving quotation from his Little Red Book.

    I’ll never forget first encountering this in the Translators’ Introduction to the Yang Xianyi and Gladys Yang translation of Dream of the Red Chamber. Two very cultured people who met and married whilst at Oxford and went back to build the New China. Having to write this kind of grovelling Mao crap in the front of such a wonderful literary work must have been galling. Mind you, by the time they got around to finishing their translation they’d had worse things happen to them.

  14. @AesopFan:

    “Some reputation.”

    Call me when the Writing’s on the Wall.

    I’m minded of the saying that the Market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.

  15. Dan Greenfield has a very grounded and sensible big picture understanding of What is Good for the Jews. I don’t think I’ve ever read anything by him that I’ve vehemently disagreed with… and he’s not shy about laying it on a bit thick around (say) Purim or when the missiles start flying. But nothing wrong with rooting for one of your teams (Unless you’re Australian — in which case, Please Get a Room).

    What matters is that he is reasonably aligned with the traditional values of the legacy population he coexists alongside with: good on immigration, good on attacking cultural degeneracy, isn’t a rabid fan of exporting jobs, and is not afraid of calling out fellow-Jews who are bad news in these departments.

    Of course one reason he is so good is because he CAN be. If a non-Jew tried any of his call-outs from the same Right-Wing perspectives, no prizes for guessing what they would be called and what would happen to them. I guess he needs to be cloned. More please!

  16. “…the Other Cheek….”

    Well, yes; but in fact, the real question is (in this case at least), how many cheeks does one have to turn? (Cue the Fourth Turning?)

    In any event, I believe the explanation in this case is that the curse that was meant to be invoked is:
    “…may they all suffer from hemorrhoids the size of cabbages.”

    Forsooth, I blame the spellchecker….

  17. And back to that glorious slugfest between the NYT and the BB (AKA the “knock ’em down drag ’em out” between Parody and Satire?), it appears that in the end, the victors may well be…the lawyers.
    https://pjmedia.com/columns/paula-bolyard/2021/06/04/new-york-times-scrambles-after-babylon-bee-sics-its-lawyers-on-them-n1452007

    Nonetheless, according to the “Times” (which should probably change its name to the “Sometimes”, or maybe even the “Never”) has accused—actually ACCUSED—the defendant of having been known to “[traffic] in misinformation under the guise of satire”.

    Would seem that all the Bee has to do is accuse the NYT of having been known to consistently “[traffic] in misinformation under the guise of reporting”.

    Open and shut—if there’s any justice wafting through the land. (Of course if the DOJ gets involved, then all bets are off….)

  18. “…keep in mind that they are avoiding other stories that should be in America’s paper of record….”

    Indeed, my “favorite” is their total blackout on the Russiagate hoax(not that they’re the only ones, certainly).

    (To be fair, having reported on Russiagate would have—mightily—gotten in the way of “The Narrative”(TM); and Russiagate was a story (well, fairytale) that had to be propagated for as long as it could so as to have as decisive-as-possible an impact on the 2018 mid-terms. One may well wonder what kind of fit the poor “Fit-to-Print” dears will have to suffer regarding the latest Fauci debacle. Heh, just kidding—they’d no doubt prefer to ignore it, ‘cept they can’t really, so they’ll spin it as wildly as they can in the good doctor’s—and China’s—favor…and to DJT’s detriment. Besides, it doesn’t really matter at this point since the OGRE has been successfully deep-sixed….so they can be as incoherent as they wish…)
    https://twitter.com/LeeSmithDC

  19. “…may they all suffer from hemorrhoids the size of cabbages.”

    In that case, let me just state for the record that Some of my Best Friends are…

    *sits down carefully*

    Shofar sho good!

  20. Companion article – this is directly related to the fake “art” maps in the Times.

    https://besacenter.org/can-the-farhud-a-slaughter-of-jews-by-their-longtime-arab-neighbors-happen-again/

    Can the Farhud, a Slaughter of Jews by Their Longtime Arab Neighbors, Happen Again? By Edwin Black June 4, 2021

    The world just marked the 80th anniversary of the Farhud, the Arab-Nazi pogrom against the Jews of Baghdad and Basra that occurred on June 1-2, 1941. The term Arab–Nazi is entirely appropriate, not simply because these Arabs were fascist in mind and deed, but because they explicitly identified with Germany’s Nazi Party. Some of the rioters wore swastikas; more than a few marched in the Nuremberg torchlight parades. The Nazi ideology that motivated the Arab slaughterers of Jews in 1941—the desire to exterminate Jews from the face of the earth—motivates the Arabs and Muslims who assault Israelis and Jews today.
    ….
    We will never know how many hundreds were murdered or mutilated, because in the investigation that followed, many were afraid to come forward. Jews had dwelled in Iraq for some 2,700 years and had greatly uplifted that modern nation. But on those two days, the Farhud spelled the beginning of the end of Iraqi Jewry, totaling more than 140,000 souls.

    After WWII, Iraq’s Jews were systematically expelled, leaving them stateless and penniless. In an official terror campaign, they were threatened with imminent doom and were subsequently airlifted out, mainly to Israel, as Arab nations sought to drop a humanitarian bomb on the new Jewish State.

    The Arab outrage against the Jews of Iraq in 1941 was part of a public international ethnic cleansing program designed to target centuries-old Jewish communities across the Middle East. It was implemented by a wide coalition of Arab and Muslim nations, coordinated by the Arab League, and openly announced at the UN. The violence played out on the front page of the New York Times.

    Be interesting to see what the Times said back then.
    We know what they are saying now.

    But enough history. Let’s talk about last month, last week, and even the hours before this article was written. We have seen a resurgence of Nazi-style pro-Palestinian, anti-Jewish violence on Europe’s and America’s streets. This is not anti-Zionist or anti-Israel agitation. It is undisguised Jew hatred.

    Mobs waving Palestinian flags have been driving through Jewish neighborhoods and marching down streets, calling out for Jews, humiliating them, threatening them, chasing them, trying to run them over, and beating them in gang assaults. This prompts the question, “Can the Farhud of 80 years ago occur again today in Europe, the Middle East, or even the US?”

    In Hitler’s day, they screamed that the Jews should get out of Europe and go back to Palestine. Today they scream, “Get out of Palestine”—but where to?

    The world asks why the Jews did not fight back against the Nazis in WWII. Today, they ask how it is that the Jews dared fight back against unremitting rocket terror launched by the new Nazis.

    These scenes are reminiscent of the run-up to the Holocaust, the farhuds, and so many other similar bloodlettings. This is because Arab militants and pro-Palestinian agitators still idealize Hitler and share his ideology with regard to the Jews.

    Hezbollah gives a Nazi salute. This mentality has infected the mainstream, too, with major editors at the AP and the BBC, to name a few, tweeting: “Hitler was right.” A few weeks ago, the Anti-Defamation League clocked 17,000 tweets in mid-May with permutations of that hashtag. A week later there were another 70,000. But who’s counting?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>