The New York Times: Further "Insensitivity" to Jews and Judaism

Earlier this year, I wrote a blog entry concerning Roger Cohen's May 28 New York Times op-ed, "Obama in Netanyahu's Web", in which I concluded:

"Finally, a word about the title of this op-ed, 'Obama in Netanyahu's Web', which will necessarily inflame anti-Semitism on the web. I didn't vote for Netanyahu, but he is not an ugly, venomous spider. Rather, he is ardent in his determination to prevent a second Holocaust, and although I do not share all his views, I share his existential concerns. Moreover, Netanyahu and his family have demonstrated dedication and courage of a kind beyond anything that the itinerant and fanciful Roger Cohen could ever hope to fathom."

I also wrote to various senior editors of The New York Times and explained, with pictures, that there is a long anti-Semitic history of depicting Jews as voracious spiders, e.g. a man-eating spider with a Star of David from the Nazi tabloid Der Sturmer.

In fact, The European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia issued a "working definition of antisemitism", which includes:

"Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism".

The New York Times ultimately agreed with me: This "was not a good headline", but it was too late to make changes.

Roger Cohen's op-ed, "The Miracle of Dullness", was published by The New York Times on September 23, 2009, during what Jews call "the days of awe" or "the ten days of repentance", the days between Rosh Hashana (New Years Day) and Yom Kippur (the Day of Atonement), when Jews engage in introspection and ask for forgiveness from those they have wronged. In this op-ed about Germany, seemingly without any connection whatsoever to Israel, Cohen suddenly inserted the following language:

"The demon [italics added] of instability, German-prodded, moved to the Middle East, where another modern nation state, Israel, in turn upended the order of things. Perhaps after 74 years (1871-1945), we will see glimmerings of a new, more peaceful regional order there."

The period 1871-1945 obviously includes the Nazi era, and the thinly disguised comparison with the militaristic Germany, including Nazi Germany, is unmistakable.

The European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia's "working definition of antisemitism" also includes, inter alia:

"Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing [italics added], or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective", and

"Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis."

Even if Cohen's op-ed, "The Miracle of Dullness", avoided falling within the EUMC's "working definition of antisemitism", I nevertheless found it offensive and again complained to The Times' editors, but this time there was no answer. My online comment in response to Cohen's subsequent op-ed, "The U.S.-Iranian Triangle", was censored (see my prior blog entry), as was an innocuous online comment in response to a later David Brooks op-ed, and it seems that I have been blacklisted by The Times.

Is Roger Cohen to blame for this ongoing proliferation of hatred? No, this is what he thinks, and this is not about to change. Ultimately the management of The New York Times must take responsibility for what it publishes.

[Concerning the past posting of rabid, anti-Semitic, online comments in response to New York Times op-eds, notwithstanding review by so-called New York Times "moderators", see:
"Why Is Antisemitism Permitted in Online Comments "Moderated" by The Times? Open Letter No. 2 to Clark Hoyt, Public Editor of The New York Times",
http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.com/2009/06/open-letter-no-2-to-clark-hoyt-public.html
and "Clark Hoyt Responds; Has The New York Times Filed for Moral Bankruptcy?",
http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.com/2009/06/clark-hoyt-responds-has-new-york-times.html]