When Will The #NewYorkTimes Stop Whitewashing Palestinian Terrorism? | #NYTIMES

March 19, 2013
(Keep In Mind)

 the long history of Arabs throwing rocks at Jews. In Jews and Arabs: Their Contacts Through the Ages, S. D. Goitein wrote in 1955:

Media_http4bpblogspot_gfdwoIn former times–and in remote places even today–it was common for Muslim schoolboys to stone Jews. When the Turks conquered Yemen in 1872, an envoy was sent from the Chief Rabbi of Istanbul to inquire what grievance the Yemenite Jews had against their neighbors. It is indicative that the first thing of which they complained was this molestation by the schoolboys. But when the Turkish Governor asked an assembly of notables to stop this nuisance,there arose an old doctor of Muslim law and explained that this stone-throwing at Jews was an age-old custom (in Arabic ‘Ada) and therefore it was unlawful to forbid it. [p. 76]


Jimmy Savile Abused 100s of Children @ the BBC While Under Mark Thompson CEO of The NYTimes today

January 13, 2013

Saville of the BBC was physically abusing hundreds of children–the youngest of whom was just 8–as well as many young adults whom he met through his high profile charity work at various children’s hospitals throughout England. The New York Times and Reuters are not keen to note who was the actual BBC chief during the end of Savile’s crime spree. As it happens, the man in charge of the BBC during the last seven years of Jimmy Savile’s life was none other than Mark Thompson, now the CEO of The New York Times. Thompson resigned as head of the BBC in September of 2012. Savile’s crimes began in Manchester in 1955, peaked in the late 70’s and early 80’s, and continued at a lower pace all the way until at least 2009, two years before his death at 85. The police report concludes that Savile committed 214 criminal offenses including 34 rapes or other serious sexual assaults across England. (MORE)

Another New York Times double standard

November 27, 2012

(Carl) Consider The New York Times reporter who was fooled by Hamas into thinking that a terrorist was a journalist. Alana Goodman adds another data point.

Samir Khan was the editor of al-Qaeda’s Inspire magazine until he was killed in a CIA drone strike, but the New York Times has yet to accuse the Obama administration of “using war as cover to target journalists.” Apparently, Israel is the only country that’s expected to treat terrorists-posing-as-reporters the same way it treats actual reporters.

 I’m sure you’re all shocked by that double standard.


The New York Times and Janet Robinson’s $24 Million Exit Package

May 28, 2012

Media companies will Cannibalize themselves like Palestinians.

(volokh.com)New York Magazine has a lengthy, fascinating – yes, even tantalizing, if, like me, you follow the business side of media and were once a NYT Co shareholder – article in the current issue on the inside process by which Janet Robinson, the ex-NYT Co CEO, was forced out in December 2011. Fired, however, with a goodbye kiss of almost $24 million, which, according to the article, was “nearly half the company’s profits in 2011.” Writer Joe Hagen says he interviewed more than 30 people “intimately familiar with different aspects” of the Times’ business, none of whom would talk for attribution – not surprising, but then leaving the reader in the position of essentially having to take the reporter on trust.
It’s a heck of a good read, and I suspect pretty much true overall, whatever quibbles other insiders might have over the details. Particularly so in its insider accounts of conflicts between the family members for whom the Times is a career, the family members for whom it is a trust fund, and the public shareholders (who, in keeping with the traditional but still peculiar newspaper ownership structure in America, have non-voting or reduced voting shares compared to the controlling family – the traditional structure at the NYT, the old LAT, the old WSJ, etc., though much altered now). As the article delicately describes the trust-fund family members, most of them “have admirable if low-wage jobs as academics, novelists, musicians, and psychotherapists, but the money [from NYT Co dividends] also funded second homes and hobbies such as underwater exploration.” Which is to say, without the dividends amounting to a trust fund, the extended family looks much like the lower tier of the New Class, which is suffering these days, and not the upper tier, which is doing fine, thanks very much.
Overall, however, the business prospects of the NYT Co. look to rest on whether it can make its digital paywall approach stick or not. I think that’s unclear, but I have divided views. On the one hand, I doubt the quality of reporting and product can be maintained without a digital subscription stream, otherwise it just dissolves into online media outlets cribbing each other for fewer and fewer tidbits of hard information with more and more cheap opinion enveloping it (if one thinks this describes the Times now, imagine a Times reporting the news from Syria as though it were Yahoo’s Your Tango – whatever one’s objections to the Times’ narrations, and I have many, things could be much, much worse). On the other hand, I’m not sure people are willing to pay for it online; I’m not sure there is a mass audience that, if put to the choice, actually cares that much – it would be convenient to say, that’s because they object to the Times’ content, but I doubt it’s that, I think people just don’t care about paying for news, period. The article notes that part of the internal shuffle involved a battle in which the former web development head, Martin Nisenholtz, fought for a free-digital model, and lost out to Robinson. She then lost out to elements of the family and to Sulzberger’s new girlfriend. Against the big picture of newspaper companies, the insider fight looks like this:

In the era of Arthur Sulzberger Jr., when newspapers have flailed under new digital realities, the New York Times Company has shrunk dramatically. Once it was a wide-ranging media empire of newspapers and TV stations and websites, and even a baseball team, that was worth almost $7 billion; today it’s essentially two struggling newspapers and a much-­reduced web company, all worth less than $1 billion (for comparison, consider that the Internet music company Pandora is valued at almost $2 billion) … Over time, there was less and less for Robinson, and [family insider executive] Michael Golden, to manage. It was inevitable, say veteran Times executives, current and former, that the two would come into conflict as their respective portfolios disappeared and the struggle for influence over the tinier island of the New York Times came to a head.

bullshit. people paid for content on paper. they will pay for it online if it’s worthy of their money. don’t give the Times any credit. My family would gladly want a subscription if their news could be trusted. There simply are too many other sources… and I trust a multitude of sources more then I trust one…. and… I believe I just stumbled on how profits will come. Do you remember those Columbia records you could get in the mail? People would pay for subscriptions if the media were bundled together. Or say like cable TV…. no one would of paid for just CNN… but bundle CNN’s biased reporting with a subscription to 100 other channels and there’s the business model. Something for everyone… even if you don’t like the media brown shirts…. and… oh shit… I really don’t want to help these narrow minded short sighted people.


NY Times comes out against democracy

November 23, 2010

The NY Times doesn’t even pretend to hide its bias any more:

JERUSALEM — Israel’s right-leaning Parliament approved legislation late Monday that could hamper the leadership’s ability to seal future peace deals with the Palestinians or Syria.
The measure requires that any peace deal involving the ceding of territory annexed by Israel — namely East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights — must be put to a national referendum.
The West Bank, which Israel never annexed, does not fall within the scope of the legislation, but it would include other pieces of sovereign Israeli territory that might be ceded in the context of land swaps in a peace agreement.

East Jerusalem became part of Israel in 1980, with the passage of the Basic Law — Jerusalem. Although the Golan Heights was not actually annexed, Israeli law and administration was extended to it in 1981.
The new law says that if the Knesset approves such a deal by a simple majority but by less than a 2/3 vote, there must be a popular referendum before it can be implemented.
Palestinian Authority negotiator Saeb Erekat is opposed because,

Ending the occupation of our land is not and cannot be dependent on any sort of referendum.

Translation: “It’s mine, give it to me.” We’ve seen this argument before.
Opposition politicians are opposed because, in the words of Kadima leader Tzipi Livni,

It is about decisions that should be taken by the leadership that understands the scale of the problems and is privy to all their aspects… The people are not a substitute for such leadership.

Translation: “We know what’s good for you.” But the history of the ‘peace process’ and the wars that followed showed that they don’t. In the famous words of Barack Obama, “elections have consequences,” and the Israeli electorate expressed their clear belief that the left-wing parties did not have their confidence after the débacles of Oslo and Gaza.
The NY times dislikes the idea, because it might “hamper” the God-given right of the Obama Administration to squeeze Israeli politicians until the blood flows.
You see, the administration’s bullies can threaten the Prime Minister and others in private, with actions that the American people — and Congress — would find repulsive. We’ve seen hints of this already in suggestions that the US might not veto a Security Council resolution establishing a Palestinian state on the basis of the 1949 lines, something that could lead to economic sanctions or even military force against Israel.
A referendum would wreck this strategy. Any threats would have to be public ones.
The Times faithfully reflects administration thinking on this issue, and the attitude toward democracy is telling.


Tom Friedman of the NYTimes: Many people in the US are fed up with Israel

October 23, 2010
America is fed up alright. they are fed up with the New York Times. No one is reading it. It is on life support from some Lebanese guy named Carlos Slim who owns Telecom Companies in Mexico and Central America. The rates of this Telecom are the worst proportionately to income in the world. Essentially you are listening to a voice that is the equivalent to the public relations of your worst enemy. They even have Lebanese tourist ads in the Magazine section… I recorded that on video. This man is very out of touch. He speaks for the same Corporate types who are finding loopholes for multinational companies like Google, facebook and the rest of communications. These people in these positions are notoriously out of sync with what the people think. I’m not saying the public is right or genius, but they are not reading the New York Times (which ain’t genius either) and anything written there is ignored. The few people who do swallow the ravings of the paper are dedicated with religious fervor, but they scare most of us in America.

In an interview broadcast on Saturday, New York Times columnist Tom Friedman told Israel’s Channel 2 television that many people in the United States are fed up with Israel.

New York Times opinion columnist Thomas Friedman said that many Americans are becoming “fed up” with Israel. Friedman’s comments came in an interview with Channel Two reporter Dana Weiss aired on Saturday.
Friedman stated that while the American public was by no means anti-Israel, they no longer care about the Israeli-Arab conflict and this could eventually hurt Israel’s national security interests, as the US is Israel’s only friend.
Friedman added that he believes Israel is not doing the utmost to promote renewed peace talks with the Palestinians. Friedman derided Israel’s calls for the Palestinians to recognize Israel as a Jewish State in exchange for a renewed freeze on construction in the settlements that could revive peace talks. He jokingly said that Israel is asking for “Abu Mazen [Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas] to sing Hatikva [Israel’s national anthem] in perfect Yiddish.”
The New York Times columnist also lamented the fact that young American Jews are drifting away from Israel.
Friedman’s comments followed a controversial op-ed entitled “Just Knock it Off” that appeared in Tuesday’s New York Times in which he said “Israel today really is behaving like a spoiled child.”

People are more savvy then the media claims. they know who the enemy is. they might not realize that the Left, the “Green” and the Libertarians are funded by the very oil money they claim to detest so much… but nothing is better for oil profit then the editorial of the Times.


Blaming the victims: The New York Times sick coverage

September 1, 2010
one wonders how people can read this seriously even if they are supportive of Palestine. How can any one take these editorials seriously? This is not journalism to assume that a family of people that choose to live where they want are guilty and should die because a journalist doesn’t like a government. Should we apply that mentality on the N.Y. Times and bomb their building near Times Square?

I had not realized how truly sick the New York Times’ coverage of the terror attack was. In the very first paragraph:

The killing of four Israeli settlers, including a pregnant woman, in the West Bank on Tuesday evening rattled Israeli and Palestinian leaders on the eve of peace talks in Washington and underscored the disruptive role that the issue of Jewish settlements could play in the already fragile negotiations.

The New York Times is agreeing with Hamas – Jews living on their historic homeland are the main evil in the Middle East, and this terror attack highlights the “disruptive role” of their communities.
The terror attack itself is not disruptive. Hell, that’s expected. If only those uppity Jews would give in to Hamas’ reasonable demands to leave or get slaughtered, then peace would reign.
Also, the New York Times highlights the victims as ‘settlers’ in the first sentence – not Israelis, not civilians, not travelers. No, the NYT defines them in terms of their pejorative term for proud Jews who exercise their free will and choose to live in a place that has the most spiritual meaning for them.


is the New York Times gloating any better then these people below?

3,000 Hamas Supporters Celebrate the Cold-Blooded Murder of Four Jews and a Fetus

Hebron-attack-celebratePalestinians, supporters of the Islamic Hamas  group, raise their right index fingers in the air as a sign of loyalty to the group during a rally, to celebrate a militant attack in the southern West Bank, in the Jebaliya Refugee camp in the northern Gaza Strip, Tuesday, Aug. 31, 2010. A Palestinian gunman opened fire on an Israeli vehicle traveling in the West Bank on Tuesday, killing four passengers, authorities said, in a deadly attack that cast a long shadow over Mideast peace talks set to start this week. AP Photo.

Hebron-attack-celebrate2
A Palestinian boy holding a toy gun is carried by his father as they celebrate the shooting attack in the West Bank, in Jabalya refugee camp in the northern Gaza Strip  August 31, 2010. Four Israeli settlers were shot dead in their car in a drive-by attack in the occupied West Bank on Tuesday, on the eve of a U.S.-sponsored Middle East peace summit in Washington. The armed wing of the Islamist Hamas  movement, the Islamist group which controls the Gaza Strip and opposes peace talks, claimed responsibility for the shooting in a statement. Reuters

Hebron-attack-celebrate3
Palestinians celebrate in Jabalya Refugee camp northern Gaza Strip on August 31, 2010 after an attack in Hebron. Four Israelis were shot dead nearby in what police and the military said was a Palestinian ambush, just ahead of renewed peace talks. The military wing of the Islamist Hamas said it was behind the killing of four Israelis in an attack near the West Bank settlement of Kiryat Arba today. Getty Images.
Hebron-attack-celebrate4
Hamas supporters celebrate the shooting attack in the West Bank, in Jabalya refugee camp in the northern Gaza Strip, August 31, 2010. Four Israeli settlers were shot dead in their car in a drive-by attack in the occupied West Bank on Tuesday, on the eve of a U.S.-sponsored Middle East peace summit in Washington. The armed wing of the Islamist Hamas movement, the Islamist group which controls the Gaza Strip and opposes peace talks, claimed responsibility for the shooting in a statement. Reuters.
Hebron-attack-celebrate5
Palestinian children, waving green Islamic flags and making a victory sign, participate a rally, to celebrate a militant attack in the southern West Bank, in the Jebaliya Refugee camp in the northern Gaza Strip, Tuesday, Aug. 31, 2010. A Palestinian gunman opened fire on an Israeli vehicle traveling in the West Bank on Tuesday, killing four passengers, authorities said, in a deadly attack that cast a long shadow over Mideast peace talks set to start this week. AP Photo.
Hebron-attack-celebrate6
A Hamas supporter distributes sweets as they celebrate the shooting attack in the West Bank, in Jabalya refugee camp in the northern Gaza Strip, August 31, 2010. Four Israeli settlers were shot dead in their car in a drive-by attack in the occupied West Bank on Tuesday, on the eve of a U.S.-sponsored Middle East peace summit in Washington. The armed wing of the Islamist Hamas movement, the Islamist group which controls the Gaza Strip and opposes peace talks, claimed responsibility for the shooting in a statement. Reuters.

JERUSALEM – Palestinian gunmen opened fire Tuesday on an Israeli car in the West Bank and killed four passengers on the eve of a new round of Mideast peace talks in Washington. The Islamic militant group Hamas claimed responsibility.
Assailants firing from a passing car riddled the vehicle with bullets as it traveled near Hebron — a volatile city that has been a flash point of violence in the past. Some 500 ultranationalist Jewish settlers live in heavily fortified enclaves in the city amid more than 100,000 Palestinians.
One of the victims was pregnant, said police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld. Israel’s national rescue service said the victims were two men and two women, and Israeli media said everyone in the car was killed.
Video broadcast live on Israel TV late Tuesday showed a white Subaru station wagon standing at an angle at the side of a road, its windows shot out and its doors dotted with bullet holes. The car was flanked by army and police vehicles and dozens of soldiers.
The attackers fled and Israeli forces set up roadblocks and carried out searches to try to catch them.
About 3,000 people joined a rally in Gaza to celebrate the attack. Hamas military wing spokesman Abu Obeida was among them and told The Associated Press: “The Qassam Brigades announces its full responsibility for the heroic operation in Hebron.”