Tag: nyt

Netanyahu: We Will Sue NYT for Exposé Alleging Sexual Torture in Israeli Prisons

Israel is planning to sue The New York Times over a shocking report that Israeli prison officials are sexually torturing Palestinian prisoners.

Opinion columnist Nicholas Kristof’s 3,500-word exposé graphically details mind-boggling cruelty, including genital mutilation and using dogs to rape prisoners.

Such a lawsuit won’t likely succeed in U.S. courts because the Constitution forbids it. Federal law generally forbids recognizing defamation judgments in foreign courts.

The exposé appeared one day before the Times reprised an official Israeli report that detailed Hamas’ rape and sexual torture of Israeli prisoners and hostages during and after the October 7, 2023 terror raid.

The Story

Palestinians told Kristof about sexual violence against men, women, and children by myriad Israeli assailants: “soldiers, settlers, interrogators in the Shin Bet internal security agency and, above all, prison guards.”

Evidence does not show that leaders ordered the rapes, Kristof explained. But a UN report explained that sexual torture is “one of Israel’s ‘standard operating procedures’ and ‘a major element in the ill treatment of Palestinians.’” And the Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor has reported that “systematic sexual violence” is “widely practiced as part of an organized state policy.”

Kristof spoke to 14 victims. 

A freelance journalist, Sami al-Sai, 46, told Kristof that Israeli guards raped him with a rubber baton and then a carrot. A sadistic woman guard, he told Kristof, “grabbed him by the penis and testicles and joked, ‘These are mine,’ and then squeezed until he screamed from pain.”

Noting that American tax money has made the U.S. government complicit in the sex crimes, Kristof also detailed a case from the Euro-Med report. It described the repeated rape of a 42-year-old woman, which Israeli soldiers photographed and said would be released if “she did not cooperate with Israeli intelligence.”

Yet abuse, Kristof reported, went beyond — way beyond — rape.

“Many reported that they often had their genitals yanked or were beaten on the testicles. Hand-held metal detectors were used to probe between men’s naked legs and then smashed into their private parts; some men had to have their testicles amputated by doctors after beatings, according to the Euro-Med monitor,” Kristof reported.

A farmer told Kristof that Israeli guards raped him three times with a metal baton. He invited the third assault by asking for a pen and paper to write a complaint. 

Keep reading

As Evidence Mounts of Dogs Raping Palestinian Prisoners in Israeli Prisons, NYT’s Isabel Kershner Revives Unverified October 7 Rape Narrative

Isabel Kershner, a longtime correspondent for The New York Times whose sons have reportedly served in the Israeli military, is facing growing scrutiny over her latest reporting on alleged October 7 sexual violence claims — particularly as renewed attention falls on documented abuse and sexual violence agaisnt Palestinians inside Israeli detention facilities.

Public scrutiny intensified following a recent report by Nicholas Kristof in the New York Times detailing allegations of severe abuse against Palestinian detainees at Sde Teiman prison, including claims involving sexual violence and the use of dogs against prisoners, including minors. Kristof’s report helped push allegations long documented by human rights organizations into mainstream American discourse.

Yet as renewed attention focused on Palestinian detainees, Kershner published new reporting reviving disputed and unverified October 7 rape allegations attributed to Hamas. Critics argue the timing reflects a recurring media pattern: whenever scrutiny intensifies around Israeli abuses against Palestinians, major Western outlets redirect attention toward unverified claims against Hamas to justify Israel’s genocide in Gaza.

At the center of Kershner’s latest reporting is Cochav Elkayam-Levy, one of the most heavily promoted sources behind claims of Hamas sexual violence. Elkayam-Levy and her organization became central to Western media coverage after October 7, with outlets and political leaders worldwide presenting her as a leading authority on the allegations.

However, Israeli media later reported accusations that Elkayam-Levy and her commission had misled donors, exaggerated evidence collection efforts, and spread misinformation related to October 7 claims. The controversy surfaced shortly after she received the prestigious Israel Prize.

Despite repeated disclaimers acknowledging that rape allegations could not be independently verified, outlets including CNN, BBC, Associated Press, and The New York Times amplified the narratives globally. The allegations quickly became central to political messaging used to justify Israel’s assault on Gaza.

Kershner’s own role has fueled further debate about conflicts of interest in Western reporting on Israel and Palestine. Years earlier, she publicly acknowledged that her children had served in the Israeli military, prompting criticism from media watchdogs who argued that major outlets often blur the line between reporting and national alignment in coverage of Israel and Palestine. 

Keep reading

Why Does the US Have So Many Military Bases Overseas?

You can’t make this stuff up. The “liberal” New York Times has now explained why the U.S. has so many overseas military bases in the Middle East and elsewhere.

Anton Troianovski, who covers global diplomacy, writes:

The Persian Gulf war in 1991 ushered in the era of permanent, large-scale military bases in the Middle East — in part to protect oil supplies. The rationale evolved to include crushing Al Qaeda, promoting democracy and fighting the Islamic State. The bases are part of a military network spanning the globe that officials say helps project America’s economic and political power. Russia and China also have global ambitions, but their military footprint is much smaller. Russia’s main military presence outside the former Soviet Union is in Syria, where its influence has declined after the fall of the Assad regime in 2024. China has an African base near the Red Sea and is expanding elsewhere — Cambodia, for instance.

Where to begin?

Keep reading

New York Times announces the end of the climate change hoax

For almost the entirety of the half century I have lived on Earth, I have had experts, teachers, politicians and activists hectoring me about how climate change is going to destroy the planet. But this week, in The New York Times, of all places, is evidence that climate alarmism is finally cooling down.

“Democrats Do Not Have To Campaign On Climate Change Anymore,” blared the headline, this week, as author Matt Huber argues that voters are rather turned off by the subject. I would like to suggest that this is because it is the single most expensive lie in human history.

In elementary school, I endured warnings of a coming ice age, then by high school it was global warming that was minutes away from ending humanity. By the time I was an adult, the warming having failed, surprisingly, to occur, we settled on “climate change,” as the vague name for the inevitable apocalypse.

In 2018, as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., was coming into prominence, she told us that we had a mere 12 years to fix the climate problem or we would all die. In that time, untold trillions of dollars have been spent by the government, along with basically every business in the country, to hold the weather at bay, even though every prediction the alarmists have made has fallen flat.

Miami, my friends, is not underwater.

It’s not just the expense of climate alarmism, it’s what it has kept us from doing, as well. How much would a gallon of gas cost today had we been drilling for oil instead of pretending the “emergency” meant we all had to switch to electric cars by next Tuesday?

With precious few exceptions, every single thing in our lives has been made much more expensive by the cult of climate and its constant lamentations about the end of days. Entire generations of our youth have been terrorized, just as their parents were by nuclear bomb drills, into thinking they may be the last human beings to ever live.

Keep reading

FBI Launches Criminal Investigation into Senate Intel Committee Democrats for Leaking CLASSIFIED Intel on DNI Tulsi Gabbard to the New York Times: Report

The FBI has reportedly launched a criminal investigation into whether Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee or their staff leaked classified intelligence information to The New York Times in an apparent effort to damage Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard during her confirmation battle.

According to reporting from Just the News, the probe centers on a National Security Agency criminal referral last year tied to the disclosure of a classified overseas intercept that surfaced in a New York Times report during Gabbard’s contentious nomination process.

Sources told the outlet that FBI Director Kash Patel moved quickly after learning of the dormant referral, opening a criminal investigation into whether Senate Intelligence Committee Democrats or their staff improperly disclosed classified material.

The alleged leak reportedly involved intelligence tied to Gabbard’s 2017 Syria trip.

The intercepts reportedly captured two Hezbollah terrorists discussing Gabbard’s 2017 trip to Syria, where they claimed she met with “the big guy.”

The classified material was in the hands of Senate Intelligence Committee Democrats and their staff before it magically appeared in the New York Times hit piece.

Keep reading

The New York Times’s Latte Logic of Social Collapse

Three days before a 31-year-old male stormed the White House Correspondents Dinner, hoping to assassinate President Donald Trump and members of his cabinet, the New York Times published a 35-minute video titled: “‘The Rich Don’t Play by the Rules. So Why Should I?’ Why petty theft might be the new political protest.” In it, a Times editor interviewed two other members of the media aristocracy about the moral code shared by a large swathe of young Americans.

That code justifies theft—and even violence—when harnessed to a fashionably left-wing cause. None of the participants—podcasting celebrity Hasan Piker, New Yorker writer Jia Tolentino, and Times opinion editor Nadja Spiegelman—expressed alarm at the glorification of crime. They smirked and giggled through the discussion, betraying a breezy indifference to lawbreaking.

It was striking enough that the Times published the video after reviewing the final cut. The paper was not embarrassed by the participants’ ignorance and entitlement. Nor was it troubled, apparently, by their debate over whether the December 2024 murder of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson was “actually effective political action” or merely—and disappointingly—effective “political consciousness-raising.”

But after the assassination attempt on Trump on April 25 by yet another young megalomaniac, one might have thought that the Times would want to distance itself from its hipster commentators and their ends-justify-the-means morality.

It apparently feels no such discomfort, however, and thus has left the video online. That is fortunate. The exchange offers a more revealing window into left-wing political violence than the latest would-be assassin’s predictably disjointed manifesto. When future archeologists seek to date the moment that the demise of the West became inevitable, this artefact of peak decadence will be a strong contender.

The video’s most memorable feature is the visual contrast between the participants’ studied downtown chic and their professed identification with what Piker calls the “masses.” Tolentino’s makeup is flawless, accentuating her exotic feline beauty; her nails gleam with shell-pink lacquer; her carefully styled waves glow with tawny highlights; her low-cut denim tank top, jeans, and high-heeled boots signal urban sophisticate. This outfit may not be ideally suited to organizing the proletarian “sabotage and, sort of, engagement with property destruction” she evokes with wistful nostalgia. But it fits perfectly in the all-white Brooklyn loft where the interview was filmed.

Piker sports a powder-blue, long-sleeved Ralph Lauren shirt, complete with polo pony logo. His tennis shoes are by Adidas, the very embodiment of the “system of global capital” that he claims to want to overthrow, complete with allegations of labor abuses in its Chinese, Vietnamese, and Indonesian factories.

Admittedly, Spiegelman’s plumpness might earn her some demerits when trying to enter a Soho nightspot, but her Times affiliation can do wonders to overcome deviations from the optimal clubbing look.

Keep reading

Government Sues New York Times for Alleged Discrimination Against White Man

The New York Times is making news itself these days, with a “diversity and inclusion” drive that’s dragged it into court.

One of the most influential liberal news outlets in the nation is facing a federal lawsuit from President Donald Trump’s administration over alleged discrimination against an unidentified white male employee in favor of women, blacks, and other nonwhites when a promotion was at stake.

And the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission clearly isn’t fooling around.

In the lawsuit, according to the New York Post, the alleged victim claimed the Times employee had been passed over for a promotion in favor of a final panel of candidates that included “a white woman, a Black man, an Asian female and a multiracial female.”

According to a New York Times report about the suit, the alleged victim claimed that the promotion of a white man would fail to follow the newspaper’s own goals as described in a 2021 document called “Call to Action.”

“A decrease in the percentage of White male employees (whether new hires, existing employees, or those in leadership, as appropriate) was a necessary consequence for the NYT to achieve these results,” the article noted, citing the lawsuit.

The man at the heart of the issue has been working at the newspaper since 2014, according to the New York Times report. Last year, he applied for a job as deputy real estate editor, the newspaper stated. He did get one interview for the job, but never made it to the panel interview stage.

The EEOC lawsuit claims he is more qualified than the person who received the promotion.

Keep reading

The Moral Malaise: The New York Times Makes The Case For “Microlooting” To Murder

“It is so hard to live ethically in an unethical society.” That lament heard this week from New York Times opinion culture editor Nadja Spiegelman could well be the Democratic Party’s epitaph.

Spiegelman was interviewing two left-wing influencers about how everything from shoplifting to murder may be excusable today in light of the unfairness they see in society.

The podcast, a product of the nation’s newspaper of record, reveled in the moral relativism that has taken over the American left. It featured the ravings of the antisemitic Marxist streamer Hasan Piker, who calmly explained how the murder of United Healthcare executive Brian Thompson was perfectly understandable. His rationalization came from Marxist revolutionary Friedrich Engels, who had called capitalism “social murder.” If capitalists are “social murderers,” then why not kill them? The logic is liberating and lethal for some on the left looking for a license for violence.

Mind you, this same newspaper had once condemned and effectively banned a U.S. senator for writing an op-ed advocating the use of the military to quell violent protests during the summer of George Floyd’s death. The Times even forced out its own opinion editor for having the temerity to publish such an opinion.

But glorifying murder? The suggestion of open hunting season on corporate executives did not appear to shock or repel Spiegelman. After all, we are living in “an unethical society.” She explained that many felt that the murder of Thompson, the father of two, meant that “finally, someone can actually do something about health care.”

Even liberal comedians are practicing a literal version of slapstick. Margaret Cho this week declared that “we need a feral, bloodthirsty, violent Democrat.”

To be fair, Spiegelman did concede that it might seem a bit “scary” for some to start murdering our way to social justice.

She also explained that shoplifting can be justifiable because people are “stealing from Whole Foods — not just for the thrill of it, but out of a feeling of anger and moral justification.”

New Yorker writer Jia Tolentino also contributed to the podcast, titled “The Rich Don’t Play by the Rules. So Why Should I?” She immediately threw in her own experience with “microlooting” and explained why it is arguably moral: “I have, under very specific circumstances. I will say, I think that stealing from a big-box store [isn’t] significant as a moral wrong, nor is it significant in any way as protest.”

She detailed her own past thefts and added, “I didn’t feel bad about it at all, in part because the store was a corporation. And it certainly felt, in a utilitarian sense, I was like, this is not a big deal. Right, guys?”

Not in the confines of the New York Times, where apparently you are entitled to all goods that are fit to pilfer.

The bizarre exchange highlighted the moral chasm that is opening its maw on today’s political left. In my book “Rage and the Republic,” I write about how rage helps people excuse any offense or attack. It dismisses the humanity of others and provides a license to hate completely and without reservation.

It is not really murder or theft if there are no real humans on the other side, is it?

Other columnists have defended such property crimes. Washington Post writer Maura Judkis ran a column mocking shoplifting stories as the “moral panic” of a nation built on “stolen land.” It is reminiscent of those who excused rioting in past summers “as an expression of power” and demanded that the media refer to looters as “protesters.”

Former New York Times writer (and now Howard University Journalism Professor) Nikole Hannah-Jones went so far as to call on journalists not to cover shoplifting crimes.

Keep reading

They Can’t Even Flip Burgers

The Protected Class Finally Meets The Real World

The New York Times tried to write a sympathy piece for the USAID class. It accidentally wrote an indictment. The villain of the story was supposed to be DOGE, the great orange-bad-men-with-spreadsheets monster that came into Washington and started cutting through the federal fat farm. The victims were supposed to be the noble public servants, contractors, grant managers, NGO executives, and democracy-development professionals who suddenly found themselves outside the taxpayer-funded cocoon. Then the Times gave away the whole game: one former senior vice president at a USAID-funded nonprofit had been making roughly $272,000 a year, and after the gravy train jumped the tracks, she was interviewing for a $19-an-hour job at a spice store.

Normal Americans did not read that and reach for a tissue. They read it and asked the only question that matters: what in God’s name were we paying for?

That is what the coastal press still does not understand. A quarter-million-dollar salary means something in the real country. It means working years of double shifts. It means a house is paid off. It means college tuition. It means a small business surviving another year. It means a mechanic, a nurse, a trucker, a cop, a farmer, or a welder would have to grind for years to see what one USAID-world executive was pulling down annually from a system most Americans cannot even see, let alone audit. Then we are supposed to cry because the private economy looked at that résumé and said, “the best we can do is 19 bucks an hour.”

No. That is not a human-interest story. That is a flashing red light.

The entire Times frame is backward. DOGE was treated like the marauding villain because it dared to question the sacred bureaucracy. How dare anyone cut government jobs? How dare anyone interrupt the NGO pipeline? How dare anyone ask whether these programs actually work? How dare anyone touch the soft, padded, credentialed ecosystem where public money flows into nonprofit offices, consultant contracts, administrative salaries, stakeholder meetings, and reports about reports. The Times wants Americans to see cruelty. What Americans see is confirmation.

Keep reading

New York Times Portrays Fired USAID Staff as Victims — Reaction Is Not What They Expected

In July 2025, Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced that USAID would no longer send foreign assistance across the globe.

Rubio noted that USAID had, for decades, failed to ensure the programs it funded actually supported America’s interests.

“Beyond creating a globe-spanning NGO industrial complex at taxpayer expense, USAID has little to show since the end of the Cold War. Development objectives have rarely been met, instability has often worsened, and anti-American sentiment has only grown,” Rubio wrote in a blog post, according to Fox News.

“This era of government-sanctioned inefficiency has officially come to an end. Under the Trump Administration, we will finally have a foreign funding mission in America that prioritizes our national interests. As of July 1st, USAID will officially cease to implement foreign assistance. Foreign assistance programs that align with administration policies—and which advance American interests—will be administered by the State Department, where they will be delivered with more accountability, strategy, and efficiency,” Rubio said.

During the summer of 2025, the DOGE team announced they had eliminated another $14.3 billion in bogus contracts, including international contracts tied to USAID.

Following the funding cuts, the agency went from roughly 10,000–16,000 direct employees (plus hundreds of thousands of contractors and local staff overseas) to under 300 remaining staff. Over 90–97% of USAID’s workforce was eliminated.

Elisabeth Bumiller and Eileen Sullivan wrote A Year After U.S.A.I.D.’s Death, Fired Workers Find Few Jobs and Much Loss for The New York Times, bemoaning the struggles of the laid-off workers, something thousands of Americans face each day without fawning coverage from the outlet.

The authors share the example of a USAID-funded senior VP,making $272,000, or roughly five times more than the median income of the average American worker.

Keep reading