NY Times stealth-edits report saying AOC faced ‘powerful’ pro-Israel ‘lobbyists and rabbis’ on Iron Dome vote


You Might Also Like

– Advertisement –

The Gray Lady initially framed the story as ‘caught between its principles’ and ‘powerful’ Jews as members of the far-left.

– Advertisement –

The New York Times was caught stealthily editing a report that suggested progressive lawmakers had moved to Israel amid pressure from “powerful” rabbis and lobbyists after the paper was criticized on social media for the original framing of the story. Struggled to vote against funding the Iron Dome.

The House on Thursday voted overwhelmingly in favor of providing $1 billion for Israel’s defense system, following backlash from the party’s more moderate wing after Democratic “squads” initially stripped funding from the massive spending bill. .


The bill, which received strong bipartisan support in a 420-9 vote, was dramatic until the very end as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D.N.Y. Changed her vote from “no” to “present”, a decision that left her in tears on the floor of the House. Reps Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich., and Ilhan Omar, D-Min. Just as his “squad” allies voted against financial aid to Israel.

New York Times sneak-edited report on Hunter Biden laptop story, scrubs ‘unproven’ after backlash

– Advertisement –

However, a report Times. published by Documenting the turmoil among Democrats offered a peculiar description of how much progressives protested when casting votes.

Minutes before the vote closed, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez burst into tears with her colleagues before changing her vote to ‘current.’ The tableau underscored how frightening the vote was even for outspoken progressives who are caught between his principles and the still-powerful pro-Israeli voices in his party, such as influential lobbyists and rabbis,” Times congressional correspondent Katie Edmondson initially wrote.

That paragraph raised eyebrows among critics on social media.

[email protected] frames the #IronDome vote as ‘principles’—-the honorable target of the killing of Israeli civilians by Hamas—and the raw naked power of the evil Jewish lobby. Including the rabbis! This is so bad! ” Journalist Gary Weiss reacted.

AOC roasted for shedding ‘crocodile tears’ after crying over Israel Iron Dome house vote

“97% of Congress members supported a proposal to fund #IronDome because it saves lives. But @nytimes wants people to believe it was a tough call, because of *principles* and *powerful lobbyists* What a poor way to frame the issue of protecting civilians from missiles,” Joel M. Petlin, a contributor to the Jewish newspaper The Forward, reacted.

“I think most #Jews find it objectionable – if not outright #anti – framing #rabbis as plotting to coerce emotional blackmailers into true faith – @AOC can make up its mind – @nytimes do better ,” Doctor. Sarah Yale Hirschhorn, Visiting Assistant Israeli Studies Professor at Northwestern University, scolded the times.

“When rabbis who identify with anti-Semitism are “powerful pro-Israeli voices” but hate bigotry is “principle”, Rabbi Yaakov Menken of the Coalition for Jewish Values ​​has gone the way of @nytimes Izvestia & Der Sturmer. tweeted, referring to the Soviet Union and Nazi propaganda newspapers.

“Caught’ between their principles and, uh, powerful Jews?” Washington Examiner Commentator Beckett Adams Asked.

“Rabis Makes AOC Cry,” National Review Senior Writer Michael Brendan Dougherty wrote.

“NYT wants us to feel sympathy for the tearful @AOC. It must have been hard for it to bear the pressure of ‘powerful pro-Israeli voices and rabbis.’ But perhaps your family will suffer more than a direct hit by a Hamas rocket. worthy. Any defense,” Michael Dixon of the pro-Israel group StandwithU wrote.

“The editors of the Times openly forgot to call out anti-Semitic sentiment. Oh!” Jerusalem Post correspondent Lahav Harkov said.

AOC consoled by other members after Israel Iron Dome House vote

Following a response on Twitter, the paragraph was later changed to read only, “The tableau underscores how appalling the vote was even for outspoken progressives, who still stand by their principles and the powerful Israelites in their party.” Supporters are caught between voices.”

No editor’s note or official retraction was listed on the article to document the change. However, a correction was listed for an error that mistakenly misquoted the final vote as “490 to 9” instead of 420 to 9.

The New York Times did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Bari Weiss, a former opinion editor for the Times, announced last year that Twitter was becoming the liberal newspaper’s “ultimate editor” in his scathing resignation letter.

Last week, the Times was similarly caught stealthily editing a report related to the Hunter Biden laptop story, using the word “unproven,” which was initially used to describe the New York Post’s reporting. had gone.

A Times spokesperson told Granthshala News after the laptop story, “We regularly edit Web stories to refine the story, add new information, additional context or analysis—especially breaking news stories. This story was completely revised to include Snapchat-related news.”

Asked whether the Times regrets calling the Hunter Biden laptop reporting “baseless,” a spokesperson did not comment.

– Advertisement –

Related News

Next Post

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Trending News