Total Panic: House Dems Prepare for an Electoral Wipeout in November If Biden...
Nancy Pelosi Reportedly Took the Gloves Off to Push Joe Biden Out of...
Classmate of Would-Be Assassin Says He Was a 'Known Trump Hater,' But Feds...
Watch the Secret Service Director Flee the RNC When Confronted by GOP Senators
The Real Reason Trump Chose JD Vance
An Assassin’s Bullets and a Matter (Or Question) of Faith
What Trump Should Say Thursday Night
We Seem To Have Forgotten Something
Government Price-Fixing In Pharma is Making Things Worse
It Really Isn't About Biden vs. Trump
Waging War on Modern Agriculture and Global Nutrition
The Case for Trump: Now More Than Ever
God Is Good... Trump's Work Is Clearly Not Finished
God Is Back in the Public Square
What We Must Do Now to Help Trump Stay Alive Until November

New York Times Retracts Cartoon Depicting Trump and Netanyahu With Anti-Semitic Tropes UPDATE: NYT Apologizes

(AP Photo/Bebeto Matthews)

On Saturday, The New York Times issued a retraction, admitting their international edition published an anti-Semitic cartoon that promoted harmful tropes which are "offensive" towards Jewish people and it was "an error of judgment publishing it." 


The cartoon, seen below, depicts Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as a dog with the Star of David leading a scowling Donald Trump with what appears to be a yarmulke (the NYT said it was a 'skullcap') and dark sunglasses. 

The New York Times retraction, however, was not an apology. It also left many questions unanswered as to how such an obviously anti-Semitic cartoon, not even associated with the story on the page it appeared on, could have passed the gauntlet of editors. 

White House adviser Kellyanne Conway blasted the paper on Twitter, saying, "This is not an apology for promoting anti-Semitism. Apologies include words like “regret” “sorry” & wait for it - “apologize”."


Daily Wire contributor Harry Khachatrian, pondered, "In the NYTimes international: Bibi Netanyahu characterized as a dog leading a blind, Jewish Trump. When did the @nytimes hire David Duke as an editor?" 

Indeed, the KKK leader later endorsed the cartoon on Twitter, (we won't link it because who wants to give that guy a platform, except the mainstream media for some reason)

The Jerusalem Post's Seth Frantzman penned a must-read column, detailing why these sorts of cartoons are so hateful and absurd. The entire piece can be found here, but here's short a blurb below. 

via Jerusalem Post:

This is what The New York Times thinks of us Israelis. Even if they subsequently said it was an error, they thought it was okay to print a cartoon showing the US president being blindly led by the “Jewish dog”?

And not only that, those who watched as it went to print thought it was fine to put a Jewish skullcap on the US president. Dual loyalty? No need to even wrestle with that question.

It used to be that we were told that Trump was fostering “Trump antisemitism” and driving a new wave of antisemitism in the US. But the cartoon depicts him as a Jew. Well, which is it? Is he fostering antisemitism, or is he now a closet Jew being led by Israel, depicted as a Jewish dog? We used to say that images “conjured up memories” of 1930s antisemitism. This didn’t conjure it up; this showed us exactly what it looked like.

The Nazis also depicted us as animals. They also put Stars of David on us. Antisemites have compared us to dogs, pigs and monkeys before. It used to be that it was on the far-Right that Jews were depicted as controlling the world, like an octopus or a spider.


Still, liberal and former Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz argued this cartoon was not a one-off mistake, it is emblematic of a growing trend of anti-Semitism on the left hiding behind being anti-Israel.

The retraction came just hours before a madman shot up a Chabad synagogue in Poway, California. The  American Thinker's Thomas Lifson asserts that, by its own standards, the New York Times would deserve blame for the shooting after publishing the cartoon. 

"Now, I think it is nonsense to blame attempted mass assassinations on one item published somewhere. But the NYT proclaimed that standard when it gave them an excuse to vilify Sarah Palin. Now, the shoe is on the other foot (which to mix metaphors, is firmly planted in the Times’ metaphorical mouth)," Lifson wrote.

Dershowitz, and others asserted the New York Times owed its readers more information regarding the decision making process for publishing the cartoon. This article will be updated if that explanation comes.


UPDATE: The New York Times has blamed a lone editor for the mistake and has officially apologized.


Join the conversation as a VIP Member


Trending on Townhall Videos