US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu hold a joint press conference in the East Room at the White House in Washington, US, Feb/ 4, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Leah Millis
President Trump’s proposal to take over Gaza is being greeted by the New York Times with the same mixture of unremitting contempt, historical ignorance, alarmism, and disregard for factual accuracy that has characterized the newspaper’s reaction to every other pro-Israel Trump policy initiative.
A professor at George Mason University’s Antonin Scalia Law School, Eugene Kontorovich, who is also a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation, said the New York Times is “boldly lying about President Trump’s Middle East plans.”
Kontorovich pointed to a Times news analysis that included a passage stating, “Never mind that he could name no legal authority that would permit the United States to unilaterally assert control over someone else’s territory or that the forcible removal of an entire population would be a violation of international law.”
“Gaza, unlike most places in the world, is not part of any sovereign state and thus not ‘someone else’s’ in the usual sense. Nor has Trump favored forcible removal of anyone, though the Grey Lady apparently favors forcible incarceration of the entire population of Gaza,” Kontorovich said in a post on X.
The next two sentences of the Times article were also error-ridden. “Never mind that resettling two million Palestinians would be a gargantuan logistical and financial challenge, not to mention politically explosive. Never mind that it would surely require many thousands of US troops and possibly trigger more violent conflict,” the article said.
However, such an operation would not “surely require many thousands of US troops.” Trump posted to social media Thursday morning that “the Gaza Strip would be turned over to the United States by Israel at the conclusion of fighting … No soldiers by the US would be needed!”
That news analysis is not the only Times article that misleads readers about Trump’s Gaza plan or the historical context in which it is made.
As is often the case, the more named Times reporters that are involved with a story, the less reliable it is. A page-one Times article with three bylines — Michael Shear, Peter Baker, and Isabel Kershner — and with reporting and research contributed by another three journalists — Edward Wong, Adam Rasgon, and Ephrat Livni — claims “Egypt captured Gaza during the 1948 war and controlled it until Israel seized it, along with other Palestinian territory, in a 1967 war against a coalition of Arab nations seeking to destroy the Jewish state.”
Yet that ignores a period in 1956 and 1957 during which Israel, not Egypt, controlled Gaza. A headline on the New York Times front page of Sunday, Nov. 11, 1956 said, “Israel Terms Gaza Strip Integral Part of Nation.” The Nov. 3, 1956, front page Times headline included the phrase “Israelis Capture Gaza.”
The Times journalists of 2025 appear to have forgotten the 1956 to 1957 period. Or maybe they just never learned the history of the Suez crisis. The alternative — that the Times journalists themselves are aware of it, but are trying to prevent Times readers from learning about it — requires assuming an almost unthinkable level of arrogance of the Times journalists. Do they think today’s readers have no other sources of information or are incapable of checking a history book or the Times online archives?
One reason the Times might prefer to avoid mentioning the 1956 to 1957 period is that it is further evidence for the proposition that the Arabs will use Gaza as a base to launch attacks against Israel. It is also further evidence for the related proposition that when Israel withdraws from Gaza and the Arabs remain there, the Arabs will then revert to the practice of using Gaza as a base to launch attacks against Israel. That is the long pattern that Trump’s proposal for a US takeover of Gaza, and for voluntary resettlement of Gaza Arabs in other destinations, is designed to disrupt. The chance that it could succeed might explain the vehemence of some of the opposition, at the New York Times and elsewhere.
It is reminiscent of the panics during the first Trump term surrounding American withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal, recognition of Israel sovereignty in the Golan Heights, and moving of the embassy to Jerusalem. Each of those steps was accompanied by endless Times warnings of “experts” and local governments predicting dire consequences and explaining the impossibility of whatever was about to happen. They made the Times look ridiculous.
Ira Stoll was managing editor of The Forward and North American editor of The Jerusalem Post. His media critique, a regular Algemeiner feature, can be found here.
The post New York Times Freaks Out Over Trump Gaza Plan first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
Post Views: 333
