Anytime you claim that something is “state policy,” you enter serious territory.
New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristoff had no qualms claiming that sexual violence is Israel’s “organized state policy.”
Among the many explosive accusations that have caused a firestorm among Israel supporters is the claim that Israel uses trained dogs to rape prisoners.
It should be self-evident that such extraordinary accusations should require extraordinary evidence.
This is especially true at a time when animosity towards Jews and Israel is at record levels, and throwing more fuel into the fire of Jew-hatred can easily trigger more violence against Jews.
So, what is this extraordinary evidence?
It’s less than ordinary.
Kristoff cites a report from the Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor that concluded that Israel employs “systematic sexual violence” that is “widely practiced as part of an organized state policy.”
But according to Honest Reporting, Euro-Med’s bias is obvious — it has “documented links to Hamas and a long record of extreme, unverified accusations against Israel.”
Among the takeaways from Honest Reporting:
- The New York Times opinion piece alleging sexual abuse against Palestinian prisoners relied on sources with documented pro-terror sympathies and failed to disclose crucial background information that would have helped readers assess their credibility.
- Several of the article’s central allegations appear to have evolved significantly over time, with major inconsistencies left unexplained or unchallenged by the paper.
- The timing of the story’s publication immediately before a major report on Hamas’ October 7 sexual violence raises serious questions about narrative framing and editorial priorities.
One of the central sources cited in the article is Sami al-Sai. Yet as Honest Reporting notes, “the Times failed to inform readers about al-Sai’s documented history of glorifying terrorists and celebrating armed attacks against Israelis.”
What are we to make of such flimsy evidence behind such harmful accusations?
Perhaps one answer is that the Times must have a thing for assaulting Israel’s image.
Let’s look at three examples just from the past two days.
As John Podhoretz noted this morning on the Commentary podcast, in addition to Kristoff’s shameless hit job, two Times stories dramatize this trend.
First, a review of the top 100 restaurants in New York City names ethnic restaurants from around the world— and yet, somehow manages to miss one country whose innovative cuisine has been celebrated everywhere.
Can you guess what country that is?
In another piece, the Times “revealed” that Israel has a “secret operation” to win the Eurovision song contest; as Podhoretz notes, without any evidence that “anything untoward” happened. Evidently, the key fact is that Israel takes the contest very seriously and invests time and money to improve its chances. Aha, conspiracy! Secret operation!
Whether light-hearted or deadly serious, these calumnies are yet more evidence of a Times obsession with Israel, not to mention a reckless disregard for the harm done to Israel’s image. Yes, some may even call it a “rape” of that image. How would the Times react to such a charge?
Kristoff’s piece alone provides the extraordinary evidence.
