With Beinart Podcast, New York Times Pushes Zionism-Is-Racism Lie
The New York Times is doubling down on Peter Beinart’s plan to replace the Jewish state of Israel with a binational “Israel-Palestine.”What Did This Anti-Israel Org Use a Holocaust Photo For?
A Times op-ed by Beinart earlier this month called for eliminating the existing country of Israel and substituting instead something that Beinart calls “Israel-Palestine,” “a Jewish home that is also, equally, a Palestinian home” or “a Jewish home that is not a Jewish state.”
Now the Times is piling on with a podcast in which Beinart is given a half-hour of audio time to advocate what the Times podcast headline calls “The Case for a One-State Solution.” If President Donald Trump or a Republican senator had used the word “solution” in the same breath as a call to wipe Israel off the map, you can bet that it would be accused of dog-whistling echoes of the “Final Solution” faster than you can spell Jonathan Weisman, but here we are.
One gets a sense of where the Times podcast is headed not only from the introduction but from the scripted lead-in read by Times columnist Ross Douthat. “Benjamin Netanyahu’s government is now threatening formal annexation of strategic pieces of Palestinian territory, a move that signals comfort with permanent occupation,” Douthat intones. This is inaccurate and tendentious on so many levels it is hard to know where to begin. Start, though, with the Times assertion that this is “Palestinian territory.” That’s precisely what is in dispute, and in fact as recently as May 2020, the Times opinion section, after a complaint from the Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting and Analysis, corrected a subheadline that erroneously described the West Bank as “Palestinian territory.” In addition, it’s quite possible that annexation signals precisely discomfort with “permanent occupation.” Agree or disagree with annexation, the idea is that it would change the status of the annexed territories from “occupation” to lands in which Israeli law or sovereignty applies on a more permanent basis. Also, it’s not “Benjamin Netanyahu’s government,” but the democratically elected government of the people of Israel.
The podcast goes further downhill from there. Rather than really debating or challenging Beinart, the Times columnists egg him on. “Philosophically, I am completely right there with Peter,” Times columnist Michelle Goldberg says at one point, while nevertheless mildly expressing concern that the Beinart plan would “turn into a civil war.”
In a new low, American Muslims for Palestine (AMP) exploit Jewish victims of the Holocaust by falsely portraying them as Palestinian. Let's set the record straight about AMP's anti-Semitism
Palestinian Activists at Human Rights Watch
In theory, the officials, researchers, and analysts working in the area of human rights are committed to unbiased, politically neutral reporting. In practice, these words often stand in sharp contrast to the activities and biased agendas of these institutions. This bias is characteristic of many major non-governmental organizations (NGOs) claiming human rights agendas. A prime example is Human Rights Watch, which exhibits a fundamental and consistent bias against Israel.
View PDF
FINALLY: the United Nations has published our detailed exposé of the Palestinian Authority leaders, educators, textbook, schools & youth centers that demonize Jews and Israelis.
— UN Watch (@UNWatch) July 29, 2020
This is now an official document of the world body: https://t.co/mYLCl3CFE8 https://t.co/JLb0ErrDA1