Posts
An Egyptian national has been handed a life sentence for firebombing a pro-Israel demonstration in Boulder, Colorado. In that attack last June, a Holocaust survivor was tragically killed. Karol Markowicz, a Fox News columnist, has drawn attention to the surge of anti-Semitism now visible across the United States, especially in the blue states, where violent attacks have multiplied. Her observations come in the wake of fresh clashes between an anti-Israel mob and the NYPD outside a New York City synagogue.
In New York, protesters gathered on Thursday outside the headquarters of former newspaper and current rag, The New York Times.
Their outrage was directed at a ludicrous opinion piece by the anti-Semitic lunatic columnist Nicholas Kristof.
The piece contained lurid allegations of serial sexual abuse by Israelis against Palestinian detainees. The article presented the testimony of men and women who alleged "brutal sexual abuse at the hands of Israel’s prison guards, soldiers, settlers and interrogators." Among the bogus bizarre claims were that Palestinians "had their genitals yanked or were beaten on the testicles," that "some men had to have their testicles amputated by doctors," and that metal batons were used to rape men. No victims came forth, no evidence exists.
Kristof further reported that a Gaza journalist claimed he was "mounted" by a dog, before adding that "Other Palestinian prisoners and human rights monitors have also cited reports of police dogs being coached to rape prisoners." Again, no evidence was provided and the idea that Israelis would put themselves in such a tenuous public position is not merely disgusting and crazy, it's illogical.
The article met with immediate and fierce backlash from readers and from the Israeli government, which has threatened legal action against The Times. Commentators have rightly questioned the piece, noting that several of those interviewed by Kristof maintained ties to Hamas or to anti-Israel activism.
The controversy soon spilled onto the streets. Only two days after publication, protesters assembled outside The New York Times building, demanding a retraction and, in some cases, the dismissal of Kristof himself. Many in the gathering were understandably livid.
Protesters stood inside NYPD barricades holding signs that read "Shame on The New York Times for publishing anti-Zionist libels" and "The New York Times: All the blood libel that's fit to print." They chanted for a retraction. Many carried Israeli and American flags, some of them combined in a single banner.
The article met with immediate and fierce backlash from readers and from the Israeli government, which has threatened legal action against The Times. Commentators have rightly questioned the piece, noting that several of those interviewed by Kristof maintained ties to Hamas or to anti-Israel activism.
The controversy soon spilled onto the streets. Only two days after publication, protesters assembled outside The New York Times building, demanding a retraction and, in some cases, the dismissal of Kristof himself. Many in the gathering were understandably livid.
Protesters stood inside NYPD barricades holding signs that read "Shame on The New York Times for publishing anti-Zionist libels" and "The New York Times: All the blood libel that's fit to print." They chanted for a retraction. Many carried Israeli and American flags, some of them combined in a single banner.
"All the sh*t that fits, they print."
The protest had come together with remarkable speed. Ramon Maislen told Fox News Digital that the effort was organized over WhatsApp in less than forty-eight hours. "The group came together and in 48 hours we are making this happen," he said. "I think it's really important because we've got to get the word out that when you create libel against people, it ends up having violence against them, and we're trying to avoid that."
The demonstrators were angered not only by the content but by the timing. They saw the piece as a deliberate attempt to overshadow reports on the sexual violence suffered by victims of the October 7 massacre.
The protest had come together with remarkable speed. Ramon Maislen told Fox News Digital that the effort was organized over WhatsApp in less than forty-eight hours. "The group came together and in 48 hours we are making this happen," he said. "I think it's really important because we've got to get the word out that when you create libel against people, it ends up having violence against them, and we're trying to avoid that."
The demonstrators were angered not only by the content but by the timing. They saw the piece as a deliberate attempt to overshadow reports on the sexual violence suffered by victims of the October 7 massacre.
One organizer, Jayne Zirkle, Director of Communications and Outreach for The Lawfare Project, made the point plainly. "They published a slanderous article against Israel, and they did this just a day before the October 7th rape report came out," she said. "They want to take away from the horrible sexual abuse that the October 7th victims endured, and we are demanding retraction. We're demanding better journalism."
Adam Louis-Klein, founder of the Movement Against Anti-Zionism, went further. He argued that the article portrayed Israelis as uniquely barbaric and placed Jews everywhere in danger. "It's a racist, defamatory libel. It's meant to make all Israelis look evil and bestial," he said.
Zach Sage Fox, a pro-Israel influencer who addressed the crowd, accused Kristof of relying on "Hamas sources and propaganda to the point of insanity." "They actually have to make up blood libels from the medieval times to paint a picture of the Jews," Fox told Fox News Digital. He warned that even a retraction would come too late, given how widely the claims had already spread. Fox also recalled The Times' own shameful record during the Holocaust. In 2001, on the paper's 150th anniversary, its former Executive Editor Max Frankel described its coverage of the genocide as "the century's bitterest journalistic failure." "History repeats itself, and now, it's reposting itself," Fox observed. He called for Kristof to be fired at once, along with anyone else involved in approving the piece.
The Times declined to comment to Fox News Digital. It has instead issued statements defending the article. Spokesperson Charlie Stadtlander insisted that Kristof's work was "backed by independent studies" and rejected any suggestion of retraction. A later statement claimed that the columnist had relied on "on-the-record accounts" and cited "several analyses documenting the practice of sexual violence and abuse conducted by various parts of Israel's security forces and settlers."
Kristof himself has acknowledged in the piece that there "is no evidence that Israeli leaders order rapes." He has continued to defend his reporting online, including the section concerning dogs. Yet a canine behaviour expert, Michael S. Gould, told National Review that the notion of training dogs to rape prisoners was "absurd." "I’ve trained dogs to do a lot of things in my life. But no, that’s absurd," he said. "It’s absurd for many reasons: the sexual instincts of dogs, their anatomy, the actual physical concept of it."
This episode is a symptom of something deeper: the return of the blood libel in respectable Western guise, dressed up as opinion and granted the platform of a once-great newspaper. The protesters outside The Times understood what was at stake. When institutions of influence traffic in such falsehoods, they do not merely damage Israel. They license violence against Jews everywhere.
Tweet
Adam Louis-Klein, founder of the Movement Against Anti-Zionism, went further. He argued that the article portrayed Israelis as uniquely barbaric and placed Jews everywhere in danger. "It's a racist, defamatory libel. It's meant to make all Israelis look evil and bestial," he said.
Zach Sage Fox, a pro-Israel influencer who addressed the crowd, accused Kristof of relying on "Hamas sources and propaganda to the point of insanity." "They actually have to make up blood libels from the medieval times to paint a picture of the Jews," Fox told Fox News Digital. He warned that even a retraction would come too late, given how widely the claims had already spread. Fox also recalled The Times' own shameful record during the Holocaust. In 2001, on the paper's 150th anniversary, its former Executive Editor Max Frankel described its coverage of the genocide as "the century's bitterest journalistic failure." "History repeats itself, and now, it's reposting itself," Fox observed. He called for Kristof to be fired at once, along with anyone else involved in approving the piece.
The Times declined to comment to Fox News Digital. It has instead issued statements defending the article. Spokesperson Charlie Stadtlander insisted that Kristof's work was "backed by independent studies" and rejected any suggestion of retraction. A later statement claimed that the columnist had relied on "on-the-record accounts" and cited "several analyses documenting the practice of sexual violence and abuse conducted by various parts of Israel's security forces and settlers."
Kristof himself has acknowledged in the piece that there "is no evidence that Israeli leaders order rapes." He has continued to defend his reporting online, including the section concerning dogs. Yet a canine behaviour expert, Michael S. Gould, told National Review that the notion of training dogs to rape prisoners was "absurd." "I’ve trained dogs to do a lot of things in my life. But no, that’s absurd," he said. "It’s absurd for many reasons: the sexual instincts of dogs, their anatomy, the actual physical concept of it."
This episode is a symptom of something deeper: the return of the blood libel in respectable Western guise, dressed up as opinion and granted the platform of a once-great newspaper. The protesters outside The Times understood what was at stake. When institutions of influence traffic in such falsehoods, they do not merely damage Israel. They license violence against Jews everywhere.
Thank you for following Brain Flushings. Please take time to simply check out the sponsors on this page--it's one way to support my work. Of course, you can Buy Me A Coffee if you want to support me directly. Finally, don't be afraid to subscribe if you enjoy the blog--it's free, and worth the cost.
