Does The New York Times (and Haaretz) Have A Right To Exist?
Does The New York Times (and Haaretz) Have A Right To Exist?

This is the tenth piece I’ve written about The New York Times and the place is still standing, so I must be doing something wrong.

Yes, I want the Times out of business, just as the Times wants Israel out of business. Fair is fair.

Same goes for Haaretz as a newspaper, like the Times, that uses Der Sturmer as its Stylebook.

So today was just another day in the world of Occupied journalism. Within any newsroom the rule goes like this: “If it bleeds, it leads.”

But not so when it comes to Israel. To toss Israel under the bus, any pretext will do.

This morning’s headline from the Times focuses, loudly, above the fold, at the very top, about Israel’s decision to scrub a plan that would separate Palestinian Arabs from Israeli Jews on some buses running along parts of Judea/Samaria, the “West Bank.”

After all the hoopla, Arabs and Jews continue to travel together in the only country in the region that does not exercise apartheid.

So the Times splashed a story about something that never happened, but close enough to give the Jewish State a black eye.

Likewise Haaretz thrilled to the chance of jumping all over Israel, which incidentally is suffering from a new wave of roadside Palestinian Arab terrorism.

Plus, there was urgent logic in the proposal (now completely dashed) to keep some buses separate but equal. Israel needs to keep track of Another day in the world of Occupied journalism.
people posing as workers who may actually be terrorists, never mind the fact that along a number of bus routes outnumbered Israeli passengers are being heckled and bullied.

On the same day that the Times and Haaretz were doing a jig for blaspheming Israel, elsewhere people were bleeding.

We are talking about Ramadi, of course, capital of Anbar Province that’s been overrun by ISIS.

A million Iraqis are in flight, most of them without shoes.

We have it from reliable sources, even the BBC, that ISIS have been going door to door executing those who can’t run fast enough.

Surely that qualifies for the rule that if it bleeds it leads. But not good enough for the Times, which has a pathological grudge against the Jewish State.

So a million Arabs (plus Christians) being decimated by other Arabs – not quite as important as a story about Israel, where nobody got hurt.

For the dramatic big picture on news media duplicity and for everything you won’t get from the Times, read this.

Also that same morning, Jews who were finally given permission to enter the Temple Mount were detained more than three hours.

Did that make a headline?

Does it ever make a headline when Jewish visitors to the Temple Mount are harassed, tormented and threatened?

Neither is it worthy of a screaming banner that Jews may not pray at the Temple Mount, but are subject to the rules of Islamic management.

THAT is apartheid.

But, you ask, am I serious about totally dissolving and dismantling The New York Times?

Shall the righteous be fired along with the wicked? 

Suppose 50 good people can be found in the newsroom at the Times, and if not 50, how about 45, 40, 30, 20 – 10?

We know how it ended for Sodom and I’m for it happening again, peacefully, but without a trace.

Jack Engelhard writes a regular column for Arutz Sheva. The new thriller from the New York-based novelist, The Bathsheba Deadline, a heroic editor’s singlehanded war on terror and against media bias. Engelhard wrote the int’l bestseller Indecent Proposal that was translated into more than 22 languages and turned into a Paramount motion picture starring Robert Redford and Demi Moore. Website: