Flood Of Condemnations Of NYT For Antisemitic Trump Cartoon

[Stratovarious]

Look man, it's still there for all to read. You just misunderstood what he said. Accept it and move on.

If you look under your refridgerator, GE has left a
handsome coupon, good toward you next car wash,
wax not included.

[enhanced_deficit]

And that’s what will happen eventually. At some point, the US media will reflect the spectrum of opinion that exists in Israel.

The media and political lobby groups in the US have long cultivated an environment where any debate or divergence of opinion on Israel or Israel related politics is verboten. It is beyond taboo. This was intentional.

The Israeli media is by no means 100% Likud Party (very similar to US neoconservatives). The US media would have you believe that is the case, but it is far from the truth. In Israel, issues are explored and debated, not reflexively shut down.

In the US, the media would hardly acknowledge that Netanyahu had any competition in the last election. And the cartoon that ran via the NYT international outlet (as opposed to the US) would be perfectly acceptable in Israel. It simply criticizes Trump as being a blind man (with regard to his knowledge of the Middle East), and Netanyahu leads him around. The left in Israel has no problem with that. The left in the US has no problem with that, except when they feel a need to maintain the one-sided US media illusion.

EM.

Well said. Last sentence reminded me of term PEP had read about while back:



PEP, and Why You Don’t Want to Be PEP

Israel/PalestineUS Politics Philip Weiss on November 19, 2008

Last week I had a great post written by Anne Silver titled, It is an awful and uncomfortable situation to encounter Jews who are progressive on every issue but Palestine. I thought Anne had put her finger on something we've all felt. Well, the other night I found out that others have already turned this rock over, and they have a name for it: "PEP." As in, He's PEP. Or, yo mama is PEP. And PEP means "Progressive Except for Palestine." My mama really is PEP!

The friend who told me about PEP says that this conference I'm going to Sunday is "the outer shores of PEP," meaning as left as you can go and still be PEP, conservative/religious-nationalist on Palestine. We shall see. I think there are some non-PEPpers there, such as Amy Goodman. But there are bound to be a lot of PEP talkers. Jerry Nadler is PEP. Ralph Seliger is PEP. J Street is kinda PEP. Obama: PEP.

https://mondoweiss.net/2008/11/pep-a...ant-to-be-pep/

[enhanced_deficit]

It's retarded since anyone with the tiniest amount of sense would be able to anticipate backlash for depicting a Jew, any Jew, as an animal sporting the Star of David.

When Trump tweeted Hillary Cash meme with image that was seen as Star of David by some, that was also called anti-semitic at the time among other things he said pre-election.


Anti-Semitism is no longer an undertone of Trump’s campaign. It’s the melody.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...2d1_story.html

[Philhelm]

When Trump tweeted Hillary Cash meme with image that was seen as Star of David by some, that was also called anti-semitic at the time among other things he said pre-election.

Anti-Semitism is no longer an undertone of Trump’s campaign. It’s the melody.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...2d1_story.html

I wouldn't consider the Hillary ad to be as overt as the cartoon (not to mention that Hillary Clinton isn't Jewish), and Trump gets more leeway than the NYT since he isn't a SJW. SJWs get less leeway specifically since they are the ones who promote a culture of trying to find the most tenuous forms of bigotry imaginable, yet a SJW organization such as the NYT releases a cartoon of a hook-nosed Jew-dog with a Star of David collar. The Trump example isn't in any way comparable, in my opinion, due to these factors.

[enhanced_deficit]

I see your point. By the same token, as NYT ownership and editorship had major jewish character, it would be hard to label them as 'anti-semitic' based on this depiction. Also both Hillary and MAGA have jewish son in laws, jewish top donors if recall election funding news correctly. Until you mentioned, doubt any of the viewers would have noticed dog's nose in any particular way but there is historic element to suggestion you made.
Devoid of any prior historic biases, to the objective eye both Hillary and MAGA depictions would appear legitimate expressions of political criticism imo.

[Superfluous Man]

I see your point. By the same token, as NYT ownership and editorship had major jewish character, it would be hard to label them as 'anti-semitic' based on this depiction. Also both Hillary and MAGA have jewish son in laws, jewish top donors if recall election funding news correctly. Until you mentioned, doubt any of the viewers would have noticed dog's nose in any particular way but there is historic element to suggestion you made.
Devoid of any prior historic biases, to the objective eye both Hillary and MAGA depictions would appear legitimate expressions of political criticism imo.

Would it be a stretch for this to be reverse psychology?

The main result of running this cartoon has been to rally support for the cause of zionism in the face of what is perceived as a recent surge in antisemitism, as exemplified both by this cartoon and the recent synagogue attack waged by a virulent anti-Trumper. Along with this incitement of defense for supporters of Israel is the completely justified association of Trump with that same zionist cause. The smears of yesteryear that Trump would embolden antisemitism now sound silly and obsolete. Nevertheless, even today, some still repeat those smears, and by running this cartoon the NYT is helping to put them to rest. Now Trump is not the catalyst for antisemitic attacks, but is himself a victim of them.

Since that is the main result of running the cartoon, and I would suggest a predictable result, is it not possible that bringing about this result is also the reason the Times ran it, even at the cost of having egg on its own face?

[enhanced_deficit]

That's some 5D thinking

The smears of yesteryear that Trump would embolden antisemitism now sound silly and obsolete?

This part is certainly true, there has been radical transformation of MAGA's pre-election image created as a result of his post-election policies.

That's an interesting thesis. In the end I think NYT's coverage on his foreign policy regrading escalation of tensions with Iran, Syria internvetion, Israel-Palestine issue would be more telling than one off-color cartoon. They did boldly push pre-Iraq war yellow cake lies to push Iraq war hysteria to aide neocons many of whom were strongly pro-Israel.

[Superfluous Man]

In the end I think NYT's coverage on his foreign policy regrading escalation of tensions with Iran, Syria internvetion, Israel-Palestine issue would be more telling than one off-color cartoon. They did boldly push pre-Iraq war yellow cake lies to push Iraq war hysteria to aide neocons many of whom were strongly pro-Israel.

Yes. And they did that all while somehow still looking like opponents of Bush, rather than supporters. They probably even ran anti-Bush cartoons in the same issues where they spread propaganda that propped up his foreign policy.

Very similar to what they're doing right now.

[enhanced_deficit]

Yes. And they did that all while somehow still looking like opponents of Bush, rather than supporters. They probably even ran anti-Bush cartoons in the same issues where they spread propaganda that propped up his foreign policy.

Very similar to what they're doing right now.

EM.

You might be on to something.


Once again, ‘NYT’ distorts the news, dishonestly making Gazans the aggressor and Israel the victim

Media Analysis James North on May 5, 2019

Here’s today’s misleading headline in the Times; “Gaza Militants Fire 250 Rockets, and Israel Responds With Airstrikes.” This is a classic Times tactic to rig its Israel/Palestine coverage; distort the timeline to make it seem like the Palestinians started the violence, and that Israel is (reluctantly) “responding.”
Amos Harel, who covers the military for the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, is hardly a supporter of Hamas. But he is an honest reporter, and you can turn to him (or one of his colleagues), rather than to the New York Times whenever there is a new outbreak of violence so you can try and figure out what is actually happening.
Amos Harel tells a more complicated story. He reports that the day before the rocket barrage, during Friday protests along the Gaza border, an Israeli jeep came under fire; one Israeli officer received “moderate” wounds and a soldier was wounded lightly. Then,

Israel responded with tanks and aerial strikes, killing two Hamas military wing members. Two more Palestinian protesters were killed by Israeli fire in separate incidents along the border.

Four dead Palestinians. Only then did the Gaza militant groups “respond,” with the rocket attack.
Of course Israeli has placed Gaza under siege for years, an act of war, so that if anyone is “retaliating” here it is the Palestinians. The Times almost never makes this point. But the paper also distorts the immediate background to the latest outbreak of violence.
Times reporter Isabel Kershner writes that the militant armed groups in Gaza are increasingly frustrated “over what they consider the slow pace of Israeli concessions meant to ease an acute economic crisis in Gaza.” Notice her biased use of the term “Israeli concessions” when she should say something like “ease up slightly on strangling Gaza economically and militarily, which has created one of the worst humanitarian crises anywhere in the world.” But you have to turn to Amos Harel and his colleagues to learn that Israel was dragging its feet in implementing the slight easing of the blockade, which had been negotiated by Egyptian officials.
(The Times report deploys another classic technique of bias. Kershner writes about “weekly protests [along the Gaza border], which have often turned violent. . .” Notice the “turned violent,” like a change in the weather for which no humans are responsible. In fact, human rights groups agree that Israel’s military is overwhelmingly responsible for the worst violence, reflected in the death toll; 183 Gazans since the Great March of Return protests started last year, vs. 0 [or 1] dead Israelis.)
The Haaretz reporters make clear that the Eurovision Song Contest, which Israel will host on May 14-18, is also motivating Gazans. Tens of millions of Europeans will be glued to their television sets during this extravaganza, and as one Hamas political source told Haaretz, “The Eurovision can’t happen in Tel Aviv when no relief is felt in Gaza. It can’t be that they will sing and enjoy while we suffer.” (The Times online version did mention the Eurovision contest, but only in passing.)
....
https://mondoweiss.net/2019/05/disto...tly-aggressor/

[James_Madison_Lives]

Here is the cartoon, cannot see in post.



As I said, cartoon not anti-semitism, and it is infuriating to see American officials run to squash the free speech of Americans against a foreign power. I hope patriotic American Jews lead the way in calling for an end to this alliance made in hell. Iran would be a more sensible power center to deal with. It has deep reach throughout the Middle East and is capable of guaranteeing safety of US interests.

[enhanced_deficit]

Why does Bill Maher get to run anti-Semitic jokes with Bari Weiss, when Ilhan Omar can’t say a word about Israel?

Media Analysis Jonathan Ofir on September 20, 2019 69 Comments






New York Times staff editor Bari Weiss is on a hell of a roll these days, having just published a book called “How to Fight anti-Semitism”. Weiss’s own paper, the New York Times, judges the book to be “a brave book”, because Weiss is ostensibly walking into perilous intellectual territory:

Should she have to fear ostracism or damage to her journalistic reputation for pointing out that anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism, while theoretically distinguishable, have long merged into a single ugly phenomenon?


Presenting Zionist apologists like Weiss as being in danger is laughable. She is representing a privileged mainstream view, one that is applied by the conservative left as well as the right in attempt to moderate voices that are starting to challenge Zionism. That’s the view of those who try to silence Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib, that’s the view of those who try to discredit Jeremy Corbyn in UK. The new voices who break through the orthodoxy are currently in the minority, but Weiss is now trying to portray herself as a representative of an oppressed and persecuted minority:

I meet such people in every Jewish community I speak to. They tend to wait until late in the evening, after the crowd has thinned out or after they’ve had a few glasses of wine, to make their confession. But the confession is always the same: I’m in the closet. It’s not their sexuality or gender expression they are closeting. It is their Jewishness and their Zionism.

https://mondoweiss.net/2019/09/semitic-weiss-israel/

[enhanced_deficit]

And that’s what will happen eventually. At some point, the US media will reflect the spectrum of opinion that exists in Israel.

The media and political lobby groups in the US have long cultivated an environment where any debate or divergence of opinion on Israel or Israel related politics is verboten. It is beyond taboo. This was intentional.

The Israeli media is by no means 100% Likud Party (very similar to US neoconservatives). The US media would have you believe that is the case, but it is far from the truth. In Israel, issues are explored and debated, not reflexively shut down.

In the US, the media would hardly acknowledge that Netanyahu had any competition in the last election. And the cartoon that ran via the NYT international outlet (as opposed to the US) would be perfectly acceptable in Israel. It simply criticizes Trump as being a blind man (with regard to his knowledge of the Middle East), and Netanyahu leads him around. The left in Israel has no problem with that. The left in the US has no problem with that, except when they feel a need to maintain the one-sided US media illusion.

Taboo might be too strong a word but there is bold leadership being shown by America-First leadership already.

Trump guts the First Amendment: signs Executive Order suppressing criticism of Israel

[enhanced_deficit]

Not a fan of NYT but compared to images and memes being published in Israeli media, NYT cartoon starts to look tame almost.


Haaretz
'Ashamed to be Jewish': As Trump base celebrates embassy move

[enhanced_deficit]

This is from Drudge, so exercise some caution:


Israeli military instructed to prepare for Trump strike on Iran...

USA, Saudis aligned...