RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/273642/max-boot-israel-and-foreign-leaders-control-trump-daniel-greenfield

Max Boot’s entire pathetic career proves the old saw about patriotism being the last refuge of a scoundrel.

His latest column in the Washington Post, a paper that has practically outsourced its coverage of the Middle East to Qatar and the Muslim Brotherhood is an attack on, what else, the idea of naming the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist group.

Let’s start by flashing back to just how ignorant Boot was about the region during the Arab Spring in this exchange on the Hugh Hewitt Show.

HH: This afternoon, Max Boot, the official news agency of the Emirates announced that it was providing, that the United Arab Emirates was providing Egypt with a billion dollar grant, and a two billion dollar interest-free loan. And Reuters reported the Saudis are approving a package totaling five billion. One of the crises has been, of course, the soaring cost of fuel in the country. So the neighboring, conservative, stable regimes are doing what they can. Doesn’t that show the United States that the region wants a non-Brotherhood-dominated government?

MB: Well, you know, regimes like the ones in Qatar or the United Arab Emirates or Saudi Arabia, of course they want a non-Muslim Brotherhood government. But they also want a non-democratic government. I mean, their preference is for strongmen autocratic types, but that’s not necessarily our preference, because we’ve seen throughout the Muslim world for decades, they’ve been rules by autocrats, and the result of that has been a backlash among their people, which has led to the creation of groups like al Qaeda, which was founded by Ayman al-Zawahiri, along with Osama bin Laden. And Zawahiri, of course, the current leader, is an Egyptian. Sayyid Qutb was an Egyptian, the father of modern Islamism. This is really where a lot of the venom and the hatred that drives forward terrorism, this is where it comes from. And so we can’t just afford to follow the advice of the Saudis or Qataris and say oh, hey, we’d like to see the military in power for another 50 years. There has to be a better way here.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/opinion/editorialboard.html

“A massive cancellation of subscriptions and advertisers is the only thing that will work…. Another suggestion is a documentary that catalogues the bias and mendacity of the paper of “Dreckord”…..

By publishing a bigoted cartoon, The Times ignored the lessons of history, including its own.

The Times published an appalling political cartoon in the opinion pages of its international print edition late last week. It portrayed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel as a dog wearing a Star of David on a collar. He was leading President Trump, drawn as a blind man wearing a skullcap.

The cartoon was chosen from a syndication service by a production editor who did not recognize its anti-Semitism. Yet however it came to be published, the appearance of such an obviously bigoted cartoon in a mainstream publication is evidence of a profound danger — not only of anti-Semitism but of numbness to its creep, to the insidious way this ancient, enduring prejudice is once again working itself into public view and common conversation.Anti-Semitic imagery is particularly dangerous now. The number of assaults against American Jews more than doubled from 2017 to 2018, rising to 39, according to areport released Tuesday by the Anti-Defamation League. On Saturday, a gunman opened fire during Passover services at a synagogue in San Diego County, killing one person and injuring three, allegedly after he posted in an online manifesto that he wanted to murder Jews. For decades, most American Jews felt safe to practice their religion, but now they pass through metal detectors to enter synagogues and schools.

https://www.jns.org/opinion/jewish-violence-what-the-gray-lady-knows-it-need-not-fear/

Cartoonists, editors or anyone else ridiculing Jews or Judaism don’t have to worry about possible violent repercussions. The same cannot be said of those making fun of Muslims or Islam.

In response to the publication of an anti-Semitic cartoon in last Thursday’s International New York Times, protesters gathered outside the Manhattan office of the “Gray Lady” on Monday evening to demand that those responsible for the blatant display of Jew-hatred be fired.

Among the speakers at the rally were former New York Assemblyman Dove Hikind and eminent law professor Alan Dershowitz, both Jewish Democrats. Hikind led the crowd in chanting, “Shame on The New York Times.” Dershowitz decried the paper’s bias against Israel, and its practice of disguising slant as news coverage and analysis.

The demonstration followed viral social-media indignation over the cartoon, which depicts a blind, kippah-wearing U.S. President Donald Trump led by a seeing-eye dog (Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu) with a Star of David hanging from his collar.

Initially, the “paper of record” issued a clarification, claiming that the publication of the cartoon had been an “error of judgement.” When ridiculed for this pathetic excuse, the Times published a better semblance of an apology, expressing “deep regret,” yet blaming a single mid-level editor for the mishap.

Nevertheless, in the following weekend edition, the International New York Times published a second cartoon—this one of Netanyahu dressed as Moses holding the Ten Commandments in one hand and a selfie-stick in the other.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/14165/what-if-the-new-york-times-cartoon-had-depicted

Only three quarters of a century after Der Stürmer incentivized the mass murder of Jews by dehumanizing them we see a revival of such bigoted caricatures.

I do not believe in free speech for me, but not for thee. But I do believe in condemning those who hide behind the First Amendment to express anti-Semitic, anti-Muslim, homophobic, sexist or racist views.

For years now, the New York Times op-ed pages have been one-sidedly anti-Israel. Its reporting has often been provably false, and all the errors tend to favor Israel’s enemies.

Most recently, the New York Times published an op-ed declaring, on Easter Sunday, that the crucified Jesus was probably a Palestinian. How absurd. How preposterous. How predictable.

Imagine if the New York Times cartoon that depicted Israel’s Prime Minister as a dog had, instead, depicted the leader of another ethnic or gender group in a similar manner? If you think that is hard to imagine that you are absolutely right. It would be inconceivable for a Times editor to have allowed the portrayal of a Muslim leader as a dog; or the leader of any other ethnic or gender group in so dehumanizing a manner.

https://quadrant.org.au/

If readers would indulge a reminiscence, let me relate an incident from decades back, when I was working for Fairfax in New York and happened to be taking a late-night drink at a now-vanished watering hole on West 43rd Street, Gough’s Chophouse. A dark and smoky armpit of a joint, it was directly across the road from what was then the New York Times HQ and frequented, as on that Saturday evening, by “Timesmen” in their preppy weekend uniform of khaki trousers and Lacoste shirts (Timeswomen mostly had the good sense to steer clear).

Fresh from putting the Sunday edition to bed, four of them were in an expansive mood and making a fair fist of four-part harmonies. Then a fifth Timesman arrived and added his voice to the barroom choirThe singing stopped on a dime. One of the quartet’s vocalists directed a withering glance at the latest tenor and said in that peculiar nasal honk which speaks of an Ivy League education, “We are Timesmen and we do things properly. If you can’t sing in tune, don’t sing at all.” His critique dripped with an arrogance verging on contempt. The Times must be a very peculiar place, I concluded.

The Times, these days singing from a different songbook, is still doing things “properly” — if the definition of proper is an astonishing eagerness to embrace and advance anti-Semitism. That’s Exhibit A above, published in the past few days by the paper that bills itself as the source of “all the news that’s fit to print”.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/the-new-york-times-inadequate-apology-for-its-anti-semitic-cartoon/

The New York Times International published an obviously anti-Semitic cartoon of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — depicted as a dog wearing a Star of David tag — leading a blind Donald Trump, who is wearing a yarmulke.

The paper has issued a mild apology on its Opinion Twitter feed — where it was soon buried by other posts–saying it “included anti-Semitic tropes” (the whole cartoon was one big anti-Semitic trope) that were “offensive,” stating passively that it “was error of judgment to print it,” and that the New York Times News Service and Syndicate has “deleted it.”

But it was in the international edition of the paper. You can’t delete that! So there will be an “editor’s note” published in Monday’s paper.I am sorry, this (sort of) apology is utterly insufficient. If the Times management was as horrified by the international edition’s transgression as they should be, they would engage in the same deep repentance — meaning a sincere and articulated apology combined with a commitment to change — that the paper would demand of other publications (particularly conservative) that committed similar wrongdoing.
17

For example, the paper should explain in detail how the cartoon came to be published. It should explain what — if any — disciplinary actions were taken against those that made the decision to print it, and what steps the paper is taking to ensure there are no repeat performances. And they need to promise to be on heightened guard against yielding to the anti-Semitic impulse.

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/04/a_fake_apology_from_fake_news_new_york_emtimesem.html

After being severely criticized for running an unsigned anti-Semitic cartoon about their most hated subjects — Jews, Israel, Trump, US of A — in their international print edition and then mocked for its pathetic excuse on numerous media sites (including American Thinker), the New York Times belatedly attempted an apology on Sunday. And once again failed. Because the Times is not sorry about printing an “offensive” cartoon; as the latest apology attempt demonstrates, it was just sorry it was caught and couldn’t get away with it this time.

Printing the unsigned cartoon with its euphemistically labelled “anti-Semitic tropes,” as the nameless Times opinion writer originally stated, was the not the NYT’s fault — oh my goodness, no! — but rather the result of a “faulty process a single editor working without adequate oversight” according to the latest bleat. In other words, not my fault because of a “faulty process!

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/04/nyts_antisemitic_cartoon_was_carefully_crafted_to_pander_to_prejudices_of_muslims_and_neonazis.html

The anti-Semitic cartoon that was published by the New York Times for readers of its international edition, many of them journalists, politicians, and opinion leader all over the world, was not causally or inadvertently offensive.

It was carefully crafted to appeal to the prejudices of Muslims and neo-Nazis.

And despite the NYT deleting it from its online version, the newsprint version that arrived on many desks and in front of the doors of upscale hotel rooms in foreign capitals and principal cities, still carries the cartoon:

Photo credit: Tom Gross Media

Portraying Benjamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of the world’s only Jewish state, as a dog speaks to the deep hatred of dogs espoused by Mohammed, who is, according to Muslims, the most perfect human being ever to walk the earth, someone to be emulated in all respects. On man’s best friend, he was quite emphatic:

Below are a number of Hadith on various aspects involving dogs. All Hadith are from the Sahih collections of Bukhari and Muslim, or the Sunan of Abu Dawud. After the Quran, Bukhari’s set of Hadith are regarded to be the second most important books in Islam, followed closely by the Hadith of Muslim…. [T]hese Hadith are not just a few isolated or unsupported cases. (snip)