Posted on 10/02/2015 2:03:56 PM PDT by Olog-hai
The ever-growing proof of an anti-Israel prejudice at The New York Times (NYT) is so extensive and persistent that the paper’s partiality is now undeniable (see this endless archive of bias reports). […]
On September 10th, the NYT singled out Jewish lawmakers on the Iran deal.
On September 15th, the NYT suggested that the Israeli who was murdered by rock-throwing Palestinians had died of a “self-inflicted accident” after the attackers had merely “pelted the road” (rather than his car). The National Review provided a detailed critique of this farcical “reporting.” […]
On September 29, (Diaa) Hadid used an anonymous European advocate of Palestinian rights as a witness to contradict Israeli army claims that a Palestinian woman shot at an IDF checkpoint was armed with a knife, but then omitted confirmatory reports from another witness mentioned in the article, a Palestinian named Fawaz Abu Aisheh, who said the woman had dropped her knife after being shot (even though Amnesty International mentioned Aisheh's corroborating testimony about the knife).
On September 30, the NYT struck again with false historical information and tendentious coverage of Abbas’ UN speech. The article, by Rick Gladstone and Jodi Rudoren, notes that “Mr. Abbas accused Israel of having systematically violated these pacts” without mentioning the many violations of the Oslo Peace Accords by Palestinians. In an article exceeding 1,000 words, the reporters make not a single reference to Palestinian Arab terrorism, a basic historical fact that is essential to any fair and balanced understanding of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. …
(Excerpt) Read more at israelnationalnews.com ...
When you read the Comment section, it's apparent that over 90% of their readers actually believe what they read in The Old Gray Whore.
As an audience, it's amazingly gullible and unquestioning.
The New York Times is the Democrat house organ. Do not expect them to vary from the party line in either editorial content or manipulated factual content.
Why Is Anyone Still Reading the Blatantly Biased Indianapolis Star??
I’ve seen that website DU and read a few posts a while ago and I’ve heard about them & Free Republic.
What I had read there never impressed me -they seem like small players to me- somewhat fringey. I prefer the big-gun opposition sites to read to get a handle on what the opinions are on the other side and it can be maddening infuriating. More than once my blood pressure has gone up when reading out right lies and disinfo .
Best to know as much about your enemy as possible.
...and then DO something with that info!
Occasionally they put in a nugget of truth, you just have to be informed enough to pick it out.
Reading the NYT is about like reading the Commie Appeal fish wrapper from Memphis. Totally Dem sided. Nothing conservative about it. The only truth you get is that the elected dems are crooks. And the people of Memphis are stupid and re-elect them.
Even if they are mad as H about the gutting of their Union medical care, and pay, while the leaders get it all. The elected crooks are rarely convicted and if they are they were railroaded. They do less time to boot.
Some are more equal than others.
Indeed. They think they are mainstream and we are the extremists.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.