RSS
New York Times Turns Students Who Harassed Jews into Victims
A taxi passes by in front of The New York Times head office, Feb. 7, 2013. Photo: Reuters / Carlo Allegri / File.
In October, after anti-Israel protesters menaced visibly Jewish students at The Cooper Union college library, The New York Times was among the many news outlets to cover the incident. Two months later, on Dec. 18, the newspaper again reported on the disturbance — this time, to recast the agitators who caused Jews to fear for their safety as the situation’s real victims.
What stands out from the incident, the Times tells readers, isn’t the harassment of students, or the disruption of studies — and certainly not the radicalization that has led so many students to align with campus groups that celebrated the Oct. 7 massacre and march against the target of the worst massacre of Jews since the Holocaust.
Rather, insists reporter Sharon Otterman, “the episode at the library and its aftermath show how a brief moment, free of context or nuance, can be repurposed by partisans in service of broader political rhetoric during a war in which information is an important weapon.”
When a Cooper Union student is quoted lamenting that frightened students were forced “into this awful position,” it wasn’t about the besieged Jews. It was about the protest leaders.
Jewish students at Cooper Union are in the library as protestors pound on the door.
Listen with sound on. pic.twitter.com/pwYRo5KA9X
— Yashar Ali (@yashar) October 25, 2023
The paper’s apologia for those who marched on the library is consistent with how it has treated other anti-Israel extremists since Oct. 7.
The Times recently came to the defense of those tearing down posters of men, women, and children abducted by Hamas, casting the heartless act by profanity-spewing vandals as a “release valve” for the “anguished.” Another recent piece was dedicated to whitewashing the slogan calling for a Palestine “from the river to the sea,” saying it is not necessarily a call for a Palestine from the river to the sea. (That geography requires the elimination of Israel.)
One piece goes so far as to listing ways to wear kaffiyehs, or Middle Eastern head scarfs, included “wrapped around the face” — in the manner of Palestinian terrorists or the pro-violence, anti-Israeli protesters who mimic them — as just another run-of-the-mill way of fashioning the scarf. (It is traditionally worn over the head, not as a disguise.)
In its Cooper Union reprise, the Times craftily slants the report to bolster its preferred narrative. The piece wastes little time before downplaying the incident as follows:
The pro-Palestinian protesters had dispersed just a few minutes later and no one was injured or arrested, but the story seemed to grow more dire the further it traveled. Posts that went viral falsely claimed that the library had been barricaded to protect the students inside from an angry mob, and that the police were afraid to get involved.
It is true that there were no objects were used to “barricade” the library doors. Instead, as the piece acknowledges 15 paragraphs later, “a security guard shut [the library’s] large gray doors and stood outside them.” The effect was the same, leading protesters to later say they were “angry about being kept out,” as the newspaper admits.
And if the college, which acknowledges that the library was closed for 20 minutes, isn’t willing to say it was closed to protect the students inside, there is nonetheless video footage in circulation in which someone can be heard telling a student, “I wouldn’t recommend leaving right now.” (He replies, “I wasn’t planning on it.”)
One of the Jewish students told CBS, “The librarians ran over to us and they were like, ‘We tried to warn you, but we just got notice that they’re coming down.’”
So if viral posts indicated that the library was barricaded to protect students, these claims were incorrect only on the margins.
After suggesting concerns about the Jews in the library were excessive, the newspaper then shifts attention from them, with the first quotation in the article serving to re-frame the story to cast those banging on the library glass as imperiled:
“Off-campus groups are very motivated to weaponize these protests,” said Angus Johnston, a historian of student activism at Hostos Community College in the Bronx. But the stakes of campus activism are now perilous. “What, 20 or 30 years ago, could have been an incident that nobody would find out about unless they were actually there has now become one that can be circulated globally and be a life-changing experience.”
Readers are left to believe Johnston is a dispassionate scholar of activism, though he is far from a neutral observer on this topic. On Oct. 7, as Hamas was mowing down Israeli civilians in their homes an at a music festival, Johnston took to social media to express indignation. Not about Hamas’ rampage — but about those distressed by it. “Lots of folks expressing moral outrage about Palestinian tactics today who I’ve never seen expressing similar outrage about Israeli tactics, ever,” he wrote on X.
If his first sentiment — during an invasion by an antisemitic terror organization known for murderous suicide bombings of city buses and restaurants — is to criticize those upset by the invasion, it should hardly be surprising that his main problem after Jewish students were intimidated by an angry mob was with those alarmed by the angry mob. That’s what The New York Times wanted. So that’s what the newspaper set out to get.
After focusing extensively on the distress of one of the anti-Israel activists, the newspaper continued downplaying the distress of the Jewish students. One sentence did made mention of the students being “visibly worried.” Another noted, “There is nervous laughter, and also concern.” And the reporter shares that a student “asks if the police were there.” But the piece neglects to share that there were six calls to 911 over concerns for the student’s safety. (Elsewhere, the reporter author cited an article that mentions these calls, so she would have been aware of it.)
And when the newspaper did eventually get around to sharing that a pro-Israel student “had felt threatened ‘when there were chants calling for the murder of Jews being chanted at me from my fellow students,’” the reporter immediately follows with doubts:
During the protest outside the school, students chanted various slogans, including the disputed phrase, “From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free,” but they denied they were calling for violence.
That others of the “various slogans” more explicitly endorsed violence apparently wasn’t fit to print. “Resistance is justified when people are occupied,” shouted students, who by the time of their October 25 demonstration would have known the murderous, horrifying extent of the “resistance” they were justifying. Another chant called for an intifada, the name given to bouts of deadly anti-Israel violence. The anti-Israel crowd continued its “intifada” calls while besieging the library, the Forward reported.
Instead of giving readers the opportunity to understand what the besieged students might have meant when referencing the threatening chants, the reporter chose to cast doubt on their truthfulness. That, apparently, is what it takes to defend anti-Israel extremists.
Gilead Ini is a Senior Research Analyst at CAMERA, the foremost media watchdog organization focused on coverage of the Arab-Israeli conflict, where a version of this article first appeared.
The post New York Times Turns Students Who Harassed Jews into Victims first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Jamaal Bowman Launches New PAC in Attempt to Unseat Pro-Israel Politicians
US Rep. Jamaal Bowman (D-NY) speaks during the National Action Network National Convention in New York City, US, April 7, 2022. Photo: REUTERS/Eduardo Munoz
Former US lawmaker Jamaal Bowman has started a new political action committee (PAC) in an attempt to raise funds for progressive candidates and unseat pro-Israel incumbents.
On Thursday, Bowman, who served in the US House of Representatives as a New York Democrat from 2021-2025, announced the creation of the “Built to Win PAC,” a new attempt to boost aspiring left-wing candidates by galvanizing minority voters. The progressive firebrand hopes that the political committee will serve as an effective competitor against groups that elevate moderate congressional candidates who, he argued, neglect the needs of working-class constituents.
“For too long, the system has failed the people. Built to Win is here to change that. We’re mobilizing Black, Arab, Asian, and Latino communities to reclaim our power. Join the movement – because when we vote, we win,” Built to Win wrote on its official X/Twitter account.
“Today, I am officially launching the Built to Win PAC. I’m back, and I’m coming back to win,” Bowman added on his own person X/Twitter page.
This is Jamaal Bowman, former Congressman from New York, reaching out to let you know that today, I am officially launching the Built To Win PAC. I’m back, and I’m coming back to win. pic.twitter.com/0JeWggAyQE
— Jamaal Bowman Ed.D. (@JamaalBowmanNY) February 27, 2025
While speaking to City & State, a media company that covers New York politics, Bowman confirmed in a new interview that the Built to Win PAC will likely prioritize targeting sitting lawmakers who support Israel.
“Any candidate that supports [Israeli Prime Minister] Benjamin Netanyahu and genocide more than their constituents, any candidate that’s tied up with corrupt crypto money, any candidate tied up with the real estate lobby as opposed to renters, we’re going to go after those candidates very aggressively,” Bowman said.
The former lawmaker has also tapped Lexis Zeidan, co-founder of the anti-Israel “Uncommitted National Movement” to help build out and manage his PAC.
The Uncommitted National Movement emerged in 2024 as a result of frustration stemming from the Israel-Hamas war. The initiative sought to encourage voters to abstain from voting first for US President Joe Biden and then for his vice president, 2024 Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris, unless they adopted anti-Israel policies.
During Bowman’s time in Congress, he established a reputation as a stalwart progressive and intense critic of American foreign policy. However, since the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, invasion of and massacre across southern Israel, Bowman narrowed his focus onto the Jewish state.
In the past year, the ex-congressman has made unsubstantiated allegations that Israel has conducted a “genocide” in Gaza while accusing the Jewish state of committing “apartheid” and “ethnic cleansing” against Palestinians in the West Bank. He also came under fire for initially dismissing widely corroborated accusations of rape against Israeli women by Hamas terrorists during their Oct. 7 onslaught as “propaganda.”
Bowman lost his Democratic primary election in June to Westchester County executive George Latimer by a staggering margin of 58 percent to 41 percent.
In contrast to Bowman, Latimer attempted to woo residents of the affluent, heavily Jewish Westchester County community by positioning himself as an ally of Israel. Furthermore, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), the foremost pro-Israel lobbying group in the United States, assisted Latimer in the primary, unleashing an eye-popping $14.5 million torrent of cash to benefit his campaign.
In the months following his loss, Bowman has repeatedly criticized AIPAC, whose mission is to foster bipartisan support for the US-Israel relationship, for involving itself in the primary battle, condemning the organization as a “Zionist regime” operated by “racist Republicans.”
Bowman, alongside former Congresswoman Cori Bush, are also set to headline a new show on the anti-Israel Zeteo network. According to the duo, the show will deliver an unvarnished look into the “corruption, the lobbying, the big money” that influences federal politics, “and how it could all be working better for you.”
The post Jamaal Bowman Launches New PAC in Attempt to Unseat Pro-Israel Politicians first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
BBC Apologizes for ‘Unacceptable’ Mistakes With Gaza Documentary, Admits Palestinian Interviewees’ Ties to Hamas
The BBC logo is seen at the entrance at Broadcasting House, the BBC headquarters in central London. Photo by Vuk Valcic / SOPA Images/Sipa USA via Reuters Connect
The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) on Thursday apologized for “unacceptable” and “serious flaws” during the filming of a documentary about Palestinian children living in the Gaza Strip.
The admission came after the BBC removed the documentary, titled “Gaza: How to Survive a Warzone,” from its iPlayer streaming platform on Feb. 21 when it was discovered that the film’s 13-year-old Palestinian narrator (now 14), Abdullah Al-Yazouri, was the son of a senior Hamas official.
The documentary was also taken down after it was revealed that two of the cameramen who worked on the BBC documentary had voiced support for Hamas, and following revelations about inaccurate translations in the film that masked the antisemitism of some participants. Examples of the latter issue include mistranslations in the film that refer to Hamas terrorists as an “army” and “jihad against the Jews” as “resistance against the Israelis,” according to Campaign Against Antisemitism (CAA), a British volunteer-based charity. The Telegraph cited at least five instances in the film where the Arabic word for “Jew”— “Yahud” or “Yahudy” — was mistranslated as “Israel” or “Israeli forces,” or removed altogether.
The BBC has also now admitted that licensing fee payments were given to the family of Al-Yazouri, who is the son of Hamas’s Deputy Minister of Agriculture Dr. Ayman Al-Yazouri. Pro-Israel researcher David Collier said the father and son come from the same family as Hamas founder Ibrahim Al-Yazouri. Hamas is designated as a terrorist organization by both the United Kingdom and United States.
Deborah Turness, the CEO of BBC News and Current Affairs, sent an e-mail to staff on Thursday that included a statement about the documentary, remarks which were publicly shared on Friday by a BBC spokesperson.
In the statement, the BBC said it takes complete editorial responsibility for the film and admitted that the corporation and Hoyo Films, the production company behind the documentary, have made “unacceptable” flaws in the making of the documentary. “BBC News takes full responsibility for these and the impact that these have had on the Corporation’s reputation. We apologize for this.”
The spokesperson added that the BBC was not informed in advance by Hoyo Films about Abdullah’s family connection to Hamas.
“During the production process, the independent production company was asked in writing a number of times by the BBC about any potential connections he and his family might have with Hamas,” the corporation explained. “Since transmission, they have acknowledged that they knew that the boy’s father was a deputy agriculture minister in the Hamas government; they have also acknowledged that they never told the BBC this fact. It was then the BBC’s own failing that we did not uncover that fact and the documentary was aired.”
Hoyo Films told the corporation that it paid Abdullah’s mother “a limited sum of money” for narrating the film by way of his sister’s bank account, according to the BBC. Hoyo Films “assured BBC” no payments were given to Hamas members or its affiliates “either directly, in kind, or as a gift,” and the corporation is “seeking additional assurance” about the film’s budget. The BBC said it will initiate a full audit of the film’s expenses and is asking Hoyo Films for financial accounts to help with the audit.
The BBC said the controversy surrounding the documentary had “damaged” public trust in the corporation’s journalism, and that “the processes and execution of this program fell short of our expectations.” The BBC also has “no plans to broadcast the program again in its current form or return it to iPlayer.” It added that it launched a review into the film, an initiative that the BBC Board discussed on Thursday.
Hoyo Films said it is working with the BBC to “help understand where mistakes have been made.” The production company added, “We feel this remains an important story to tell, and that our contributors – who have no say in the war – should have their voices heard.”
A separate statement from the BBC Board added, “The subject matter of the documentary was clearly a legitimate area to explore, but nothing is more important than trust and transparency in our journalism. While the board appreciates that mistakes can be made, the mistakes here are significant and damaging to the BBC.”
The CAA said on Friday the grave errors carried out by the BBC in connection to the documentary should result in resignations and a police investigation. The charity also called for an independent investigation into bias at the BBC and said pending the results of the investigation, the license fee should be suspended to stop additional funds from going to Abdullah’s family, and potentially Hamas. “Hundreds of people are contacting us telling us that they refuse to pay the license fee until they can be sure that the BBC is trustworthy,” the charity said.
A spokesperson for the CAA called BBC “a national treasure [that] has become a national embarrassment.”
“The BBC has now admitted that license fee funds were paid to the family of a senior Hamas official. It has not yet been able to rule out that further payments to Hamas were made as it continues to investigate where hundreds of thousands of pounds went,” the spokesperson noted. “The BBC’s statement is an exercise in desperate damage control and shows why an internal review is no substitute for an independent investigation into this documentary and the wider bias at the BBC that allowed it to be made and aired. Clearly those responsible must lose their jobs.”
“It is unconscionable that the British public should have to pay a license fee to an organization that gives that money to proscribed terrorists,” the spokesperson added. “It represents a shocking double standard in our law. Pending an independent investigation, the license fee must be suspended.”
During a press conference on Thursday, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer said the secretary of state has had a meeting with the BBC regarding the documentary. On Friday, British Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy said she was going to have an “urgent meeting” with BBC Chairman Samir Shah that same day.
“I want assurances that no stone will be left unturned by the fact-finding review now commissioned by the BBC’s director general,” Nandy said. “This review must be comprehensive, rigorous, and get to the bottom of exactly what has happened in this case. It is critical for trust in the BBC that this review happens quickly, and that appropriate action is taken on its findings.”
The post BBC Apologizes for ‘Unacceptable’ Mistakes With Gaza Documentary, Admits Palestinian Interviewees’ Ties to Hamas first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Jewish Rocker David Draiman Calls Kanye West a ‘Pathetic Jew Hater Without a Soul’ for Non-Stop Promoting Swastikas
David Draiman of Disturbed at Summerfest Music Festival on June 30, 2022, in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. Photo: Daniel DeSlover/Sipa USA
The lead singer of the rock band Disturbed intensely criticized rapper Ye, formerly known as Kanye West, on Friday after the latter reiterated his desire to make a t-shirt that features a swastika, and now also a swastika necklace.
Ye returned to X on Friday to repeat his hopes of making a shirt emblazoned with the extremist symbol used by Adolf Hitler’s Nazi party. In one post, he wrote: “It was always a dream of mine to walk around with a Swastika T on.” In a separate post, he called on jewelers to reach out to him with designs for a swastika chain necklace.
David Draiman responded by writing, “Hey @kanyewest, Here’s a design for you” and he included an emoji of a middle finger. The “Sound of Silence” singer, who is Jewish, then attacked the rapper by saying, “You’re nothing but a Jew hating, misogynistic, pathetic, attention starved A–HOLE. You’ve destroyed any legacy you once had. You will be remembered as a sad, angry excuse of a man, without honor, without decency, and without a soul.”
In early February, Ye sold on his website Yeezy.com only one item – a white, short sleeve t-shirt that featured a large black swastika on the front. He purchased a commercial that aired during Super Bowl LIX on Feb. 9 that encouraged viewers to visit his website and purchase the offensive shirt. The shirt went live on his website — which has since been shut down – two days after Ye went on a rabidly antisemitic tirade on X in which he talked about his hatred of Jews and his admiration for Hitler. He even called himself a Nazi and a racist.
The rapper said last week he has had the idea for the swastika shirt “for over eight years” and has continued to promote his affinity for the Nazi symbol repeatedly on social media.
The post Jewish Rocker David Draiman Calls Kanye West a ‘Pathetic Jew Hater Without a Soul’ for Non-Stop Promoting Swastikas first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login