RSS
From Iran Nukes to Europe-Israel Diplomacy, New York Times Can’t or Won’t Get the Context Right
The New York Times building in New York City. Photo: Wikimedia Commons
The New York Times came in with a big editorial denouncing antisemitism and infuriating the Jew-hating readers who populate its comment section — but its news pages keep spreading falsehoods about Israel.
Three recent examples show how Times reporters lack historical or even recent context.
A Times news article about Australia, Britain, Canada, New Zealand, and Norway imposing sanctions on Israeli ministers Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich includes this passage:
“Britain has already tried once to prevent us from settling the cradle of our homeland, and we will not allow it to do it again,” Mr. Smotrich posted on social media in Hebrew, referring to Jewish settlements in the West Bank.
The intended reference there actually seems to be not “Jewish settlements in the West Bank” but rather the infamous British “White Paper” of 1939 that sharply limited Jewish immigration into the British controlled mandate of Palestine. The White Paper capped Jewish migration at 75,000 over five years, during a moment when millions of Jews were desperately seeking to escape the Nazi onslaught. “After the period of five years, no further Jewish immigration will be permitted unless the Arabs of Palestine are prepared to acquiesce in it,” the White Paper said. It’s astonishing that this has somehow vanished from the Times‘ historical memory.
Another Times news article claimed, “The toll and imposition of a blockade, now partially lifted, in the territory [Gaza] have provoked growing international outrage, including among European states like France and Britain little inclined to sharp criticism of Israel in the past.” The idea that the outrage is “provoked” by Israeli actions rather than motivated by the growing and restive Muslim populations in France and Britain is questionable. There’s no outrage against Egypt, which also borders Gaza. And it’s inaccurate to say that France and Britain have been “little inclined to sharp criticism of Israel in the past.”
For example, in 2019 a French diplomatic statement said, “France condemns the decisions taken by the Israeli authorities on 5 and 6 August allowing for the construction of 2,304 housing units on the West Bank. These decisions come amid the troubling acceleration of settlement building on the West Bank and in East Jerusalem. As stated in UN Security Council Resolution 2334, these settlements are contrary to international law. This policy further heightens tensions on the ground and gravely undermines the conditions for a just and lasting peace between Israelis and Palestinians based on a two-state solution.”
A brief for the Jerusalem Center for Security and Foreign Affairs reported, “For many years, France has been the driving force behind anti-Israel political attitudes in the EU. In addition, former Israeli UN ambassador Yehuda Blum noted, ‘The French at the UN were the leaders of every anti-Israel initiative originating in Europe throughout. Theirs was a totally unbalanced position. We counted them in the Arab camp.’”
In 2002, British and French foreign ministers met with Yasser Arafat at a time when George W. Bush was trying to freeze Arafat out.
A third example of Times cluelessness comes from the paper’s “live” news coverage of the war between Israel and Iran. “In his first television interview since Israel struck Iran, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Israeli intelligence found that Iran had enough uranium to build nine nuclear bombs but did not provide any evidence for that claim,” the Times said. The “did not provide evidence” phrase is a tic that the Times uses against people it doesn’t like in order to signal to readers that what those people say cannot be trusted.
The Times itself reported in December 2024, “Iran already has enough of a stockpile to make the fuel for four weapons in a matter of weeks or days.” Another recent Times article commented on Netanyahu’s claim of nine weapons by noting, “Other experts put the figure slightly higher, at 10, but the actual number would depend on how efficiently the Iranians prove to be at producing a warhead or a bomb.”
How much more evidence does the Times want? On June 9, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency spoke publicly about Iran, saying, “The agency cannot ignore the stockpiling of over 400 kg of highly enriched uranium.” An analysis put out the same day by the Institute for Science and International Security of the May 31, 2025, IAEA quarterly monitoring report says, “Iran can convert its current stock of 60 percent enriched uranium into 233 kg of WGU in three weeks at the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant (FFEP), enough for 9 nuclear weapons, taken as 25 kg of weapon-grade uranium (WGU) per weapon … Iran could produce its first quantity of 25 kg of WGU in Fordow in as little as two to three days … Breaking out in both Fordow and the Natanz Fuel Enrichment Plant (FEP), the two facilities together could produce enough WGU for 11 nuclear weapons in the first month, enough for 15 nuclear weapons by the end of the second month, 19 by the end of the third month, 21 by the end of the fourth month, and 22 by the end of the fifth month.”
I guess the Times could litigate that Netanyahu is eliding the conversion from highly enriched to weapon-grade, but he’s giving a wartime television interview, not a technical nuclear briefing.
So, when the Times complains that Netanyahu “did not provide any evidence,” the newspaper is just displaying its own bias and lack of knowledge about the context, as surely as it did in the other examples. One thing for which there is surely a lot of evidence: the Times‘s own weak grasp of basic details, history, and context for the events unfolding in the Middle East.
Ira Stoll was managing editor of The Forward and North American editor of The Jerusalem Post. He writes frequently at TheEditors.com. His media critique, a regular Algemeiner feature, can be found here.
The post From Iran Nukes to Europe-Israel Diplomacy, New York Times Can’t or Won’t Get the Context Right first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
North London Synagogue, Nursery Targeted in Eighth Local Antisemitic Incident in Just Over a Week
Demonstrators against antisemitism in London on Sept. 8, 2025. Photo: Campaign Against Antisemitism
A synagogue and its nursery school in the Golders Green area of north London were targeted in an antisemitic attack on Thursday morning — the eighth such incident locally in just over a week amid a shocking surge of anti-Jewish hate crimes in the area.
The synagogue and Jewish nursery were smeared with excrement in an antisemitic outrage echoing a series of recent incidents targeting the local Jewish community.
“The desecration of another local synagogue and a children’s nursery with excrement is a vile, deliberate, and premeditated act of antisemitism,” Shomrim North West London, a Jewish organization that monitors antisemitism and also serves as a neighborhood watch group, said in a statement.
“This marks the eighth antisemitic incident locally in just over a week, to directly target the local Jewish community,” the statement read. “These repeated attacks have left our community anxious, hurt, and increasingly worried.”
Local law enforcement confirmed they are reviewing CCTV footage and collecting evidence to identify the suspect and bring them to justice.
This latest anti-Jewish hate crime came just days after tens of thousands of people marched through London in a demonstration against antisemitism, amid rising levels of antisemitic incidents across the United Kingdom since the Hamas-led invasion of and massacre across southern Israel on Oct. 7, 2023.
In just over a week, seven Jewish premises in Barnet, the borough in which Golders Green is located, have been targeted in separate antisemitic incidents.
According to the Metropolitan Police, an investigation has been launched into the targeted attacks, all of which involved the use of bodily fluids.
During the incidents, a substance was smeared on four synagogues and a private residence, while a liquid was thrown at a school and over a car in two other attacks.
As the investigation continues, local police said they believe the same suspect is likely responsible for all seven offenses, which are being treated as religiously motivated criminal damage.
No arrests have been made so far, but law enforcement said it is actively engaging with the local Jewish community to provide reassurance and support.
The Community Security Trust (CST), a nonprofit charity that advises Britain’s Jewish community on security matters, condemned the recent wave of attacks and called on authorities to take immediate action.
“The extreme defilement of several Jewish locations in and around Golders Green is utterly abhorrent and deeply distressing,” CST said in a statement.
“CST is working closely with police and communal partners to support victims and help identify and apprehend the perpetrator,” it continued.
The Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA) also denounced the attacks, calling for urgent measures to protect the Jewish community.
“These repeated incidents are leaving British Jews anxious and vulnerable in their own neighborhoods, not to mention disgusted,” CAA said in a statement.
Since the start of the war in Gaza, the United Kingdom has experienced a surge in antisemitic crimes and anti-Israel sentiment.
Last month, CST published a report showing there were 1,521 antisemitic incidents in the UK from January to June of this year. It marks the second-highest total of incidents ever recorded by CST in the first six months of any year, following the first half of 2024 in which 2,019 antisemitic incidents were recorded.
In total last year, CST recorded 3,528 antisemitic incidents for 2024, the country’s second worst year for antisemitism despite being an 18 percent drop from 2023’s record of 4,296.
In previous years, the numbers were significantly lower, with 1,662 incidents in 2022 and 2,261 hate crimes in 2021.
RSS
Germany to Hold Off on Recognizing Palestinian State but Will Back UN Resolution for Two-State Solution
German national flag flutters on top of the Reichstag building, that seats the Germany’s lower house of parliament, the Bundestag, in Berlin, Germany, March 25, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Lisi Niesner
Germany will support a United Nations resolution for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict but does not believe the time has come to recognize a Palestinian state, a government spokesman told Reuters on Thursday.
“Germany will support such a resolution which simply describes the status quo in international law,” the spokesman said, adding that Berlin “has always advocated a two-state solution and is asking for that all the time.”
“The chancellor just mentioned two days ago again that Germany does not see that the time has come for the recognition of the Palestinian state,” the spokesman added.
Britain, France, Canada, Australia, and Belgium have all said they will recognize a Palestinian state at the United Nations General Assembly later this month, although London said it could hold back if Israel were to take steps to ease the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and commit to a long-term peace process.
The United States strongly opposes any move by its European allies to recognize Palestinian independence.
Last week, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said that the US has told other countries that recognition of a Palestinian state will cause more problems.
Those who see recognition as a largely symbolic gesture point to the negligible presence on the ground and limited influence in the conflict of countries such as China, India, Russia, and many Arab states that have recognized Palestinian independence for decades.
RSS
UN Security Council, With US Support, Condemns Strikes on Qatar
Qatar’s Prime Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al-Thani attends an emergency meeting of the United Nations Security Council, following an Israeli attack on Hamas leaders in Doha, Qatar, at UN headquarters in New York City, US, Sept. 11, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Eduardo Munoz
The United Nations Security Council on Thursday condemned recent strikes on Qatar’s capital Doha, but did not mention Israel in the statement agreed to by all 15 members, including Israel‘s ally the United States.
Israel attempted to kill the political leaders of Hamas with the attack on Tuesday, escalating its military action in what the United States described as a unilateral attack that does not advance US and Israeli interests.
The United States traditionally shields its ally Israel at the United Nations. US backing for the Security Council statement, which could only be approved by consensus, reflects President Donald Trump’s unhappiness with the attack ordered by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
“Council members underscored the importance of de-escalation and expressed their solidarity with Qatar. They underlined their support for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Qatar,” read the statement, drafted by Britain and France.
The Doha operation was especially sensitive because Qatar has been hosting and mediating negotiations aimed at securing a ceasefire in the Gaza war.
“Council members underscored that releasing the hostages, including those killed by Hamas, and ending the war and suffering in Gaza must remain our top priority,” the Security Council statement read.
The Security Council will meet later on Thursday to discuss the Israeli attack at a meeting due to be attended by Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman al-Thani.