Someone drew it. - Who?— Mike Cernovich (@Cernovich) April 28, 2019
Someone colored it. - Who?
Someone laid it out. - Who?
I’m sure the media will be all over this, right? https://t.co/S3UECess84
All I can find in the NYT about this is "NY Times Apologizes for Cartoon With 'Anti-Semitic Tropes'" with the byline The Associated Press:
The New York Times has apologized for an anti-Semitic cartoon that appeared in the newspaper's international edition.So I guess the direct communication from the NYT is just a tweet, and the AP reported on the tweet, and the NYT carried the AP article. Why doesn't the NYT write its own article? Answer Cernovich's questions. And give a real apology!
It showed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as a dachshund wearing a Star of David collar and leading a blind and skullcap-wearing U.S. President Donald Trump.
The Times says the image "included anti-Semitic tropes." The cartoon appeared Thursday in print.
A tweet from the New York Times Opinion account Saturday said the image "was offensive, and it was an error in judgment to publish it."
The Times says the cartoon was provided by The New York Times News Service and Syndicate, which has since deleted it.
The Times may say the image "included anti-Semitic tropes," but presumably somebody at the Times either did not think the image was anti-Semitic or wanted to publish something anti-Semitic. I'd like to see the Times investigate which of those options is true.
If the former, who perceived it not to be anti-Semitic and exactly why? If the latter... the NYT has a dramatically serious problem and needs to undertake a remedy.
By the way, can anyone explain to me why the breed chosen as the Seeing-Eye dog is a dachshund? The dachshund is wearing a Star of David collar (and "is" Netanyahu) so that means the dog is Jewish. But if you were drawing a cartoon and wanted, above all, to convey that this is a Seeing-Eye dog, you would choose a German Shepherd. If you wanted to reject "German," you'd pick a Lab or a Golden Retriever.
The NYT international edition is edited in La Défense, an area just outside of Paris, and maybe the breeds used as guide dogs in France are different from what we use in the U.S. But would a dachshund ever really be a Seeing-Eye dog?
My effort to research this turned up stories about a blind dachshund that had another dog, a pit bull, as its guide. So I think it's fair to say that the dachshund was chosen for some reason other than to convey the idea of a Seeing-Eye dog.
But what reason? Perhaps it's just that it's a small dog. But it's not a generic small dog. It has a distinctive elongated shape, and the illustration exaggerates the long shape. But what does that say about Netanyahu's ability to lead Trump? Is it meant as a phallic symbol? Are we to consider the history of how this breed came about in the first place?
The standard-size dachshund was developed to scent, chase, and flush out badgers and other burrow-dwelling animals, while the miniature dachshund was bred to hunt smaller prey such as rabbits.Maybe the idea was that Netanyahu the dachshund would lead blind Trump to other animals. If so, the adversaries of Israel are being depicted as animals, which complicates the analysis.
I should add that the cartoon is extremely well-drawn and eye-catching. It's possible that people at the international NYT were just dazzled into a blunder. That would be phenomenally stupid, but stupid is the least bad explanation.
IN THE COMMENTS: Answering my question why a dachshund, wildswan notes that hot dogs were originally called "dachshund sandwiches," and hot dogs may be "seen as particularly Jewish." (There's the all-beef Kosher hot dog Hebrew National.)
And James K says: "A German Shepherd is thought of as a majestic, powerful dog. The cartoonist wanted to depict the Jew as low and slithering, hence the Dachs[h]und. Nothing more complicated than that."
Posts
167 comments:
The NYT is on the Left.
The Left is revealing its antisemitism.
Therefore, the NYT reveals its antisemitism.
Maybe not quite a syllogism.
But close.
I took the dachshund to symbolize Germany, especially Nazi Germany: thus as Nazis led other countries against the Jews, Netanayu is leading President Trump against the Palestinians.
The chosen dog is weak and would be unable to defend itself explaining why it seeks to control a powerful protector.
Trope a dope.
Yes the question is simple. Are you stupid or do you hate Jews?
The dog is short so Trump can see over it because he's just pretending to be blind, all the better to collude.
Boo, the cutest dog in all the world is also short.
Edited in France ... That's the house of dog that doesn't bark in darkness.
"I took the dachshund to symbolize Germany, especially Nazi Germany..."
Hitler famously liked German Shepherds (which are also the stereotypical seeing-eye dogs): "Blondi [Hitler's German Shepherd] played a role in Nazi propaganda by portraying Hitler as an animal lover. Dogs like Blondi were coveted as "germanische Urhunde", being close to the wolf, and became very fashionable during the Nazi era. On 29 April 1945, Hitler expressed doubts about the cyanide capsules he had received through Heinrich Himmler's SS.[7] To verify the capsules' potency, Hitler ordered Dr. Werner Haase to test one on Blondi, who died as a result." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blondi
Eva Braun, like FDR and GW Bush, preferred Scottish Terriers.
This stuff is all over Europe. The NY Times International edition is just trying to catch up with the pack there. It is the 1930's all over again and THAT'S what happens when history is either no longer taught, or taught using books by Howard Zinn.
I love when the left is always shocked- shocked- that they are the anti-semite in the room.
NYT sends thoughts and prayers to the Passover worshippers in Poway, CA.
Maybe.... I saw a description of the "Weiner Dog" on the "Which Woofs For Me", where the breed's advocate said they were inordinately headstrong, being very difficult to control much of the time.
The next day there was a shooting at a synagogue. I wonder if the NYT and the other leftist media will give the NYT the Palin treatment.
Benign meaning...
Netanyahu dachshund is simply leading Trump out of rabbithole of left narrative into sunlight, so Trump needs shades.
Yesterday, during the continuous coverage shortly after of the Synagogue shooting, Fox News invited a guest who tried to link a rise in anti-Semitism to Trump and was cut-off.
No mention by the guest of the actual words of Ilhan Omar or the NYT, of course.
Watch the embedded Twitter post, not the ad-saturated Newsweek video box at the top.
FOX NEWS CUTS OFF GUEST TYING RISE IN U.S. ANTI-SEMITISM TO TRUMP RHETORIC, CHARLOTTESVILLE
During Saturday's Fox Report with Jon Scott, former assistant secretary of state and a member of Pittsburgh's Tree of Life synagogue, Joel Rubin, had his commentary abruptly switched off by Fox News producers after he suggested a rise in U.S. anti-Semitism was connected to Trump's election and the president's equivocating response when asked to condemn the fatal violence and white nationalism exhibited at the August 2017 "Unite the Right" rally in Charlottesville, Virginia...
Scott asked Rubin to address why there has been a recent spike in anti-Semitic attacks in the U.S., including the one six months prior at his Pittsburgh synagogue, which was the deadliest assault on Jews in U.S. history.
"We've seen the spike, quite frankly, since the election of President Trump," Rubin said. "And we have seen that largely because there has been sort of a freedom to say what one wants in public. 'Jews will not replace us' was the chant in Charlottesville in August 2017 and just the other day the president essentially said they were fair".
Rubin continued for a few more seconds, ignoring the host's effort to interrupt him — "Those are the kinds of words we have to watch for," he noted, before the network's live feed abruptly cut to a commercial for the Salonpas Pain Relief patch.
The Biden libel continues.
Ann,
The editors at the NYT knew exactly what they were doing when they published an anti-Semitic cartoon. They just didn't expect this very strong negative reaction. The left is chock full of anti-Semites and this is just the latest manifestation of that very frightening fact.
There was the cartoonist for the Guardian who made similarly well drawn cartoons of Bush as a monkey, maybe related.
I also thought the choice of dachshund odd, but decided it was meant to make Netanyahu look ridiculous and puffed up. An heroic German Shepard standing proud would not have worked. It also fits the image of a low, deformed Trump.
Why is it that the Trump portrayals are anti-Semite? It is the exact opposite. Republicans and the right tend to be very pro Israel an supportive of the Jewish people and culture.
If ever there as an example of the lefts projection, this is it.
I think they saw Trump being made fun of and didn't think about anything else.
Further, it’s the lefts rhetoric that is causing a rise in these ‘hate crimes’: the constant portrayal of Trump, the right and anyone not on board with the progressive agenda is a racist, sexist, anti-Semite, and ‘literally hitler’. Keep repeating that theme and what would you expect to happen?
The NYT did NOT apologize. It acknowledged the anti-Semitic tropes, offensiveness, and an error in judgment in publishing it. At no point did it use the word "apology" or even "sorry." Usually, media expresses "regret" -- it did not do that here. The note simply acknowledged the obvious -- nothing more.
Is it meant as a phallic symbol?
Good grief! There are items--even long ones--that are not phallic symbols. You are fixated.
for the Left, as long as you couple it with Trump-bashing,
you can get away with (almost) anything.
I think the "joke" is a lapdog leading Trump around.
Democrats are anti-Semitic. End of story.
The New York Times has apologized for an anti-Semitic cartoon that appeared in the newspaper's international edition.
APPEARED? Like mushrooms overnight. Magically in the yard. Amazingly just appeared with no one having a possible clue as to how this could have happened.
What a mystery!!!
Very inconvenient that this should happen right when they wanted to blame San Diego on Trump.
"phenomenally stupid"
Now we are getting somewhere.
phenomenon--an observable fact or event.
The NYT publishes its phenomenal stupidity every day, particularly on the editorial page. I bet Bret Stephens is wondering if it was worth it to don the motley at the NYT.
Julius Streicher would be proud. This would easily be front-page material published in his Der Stürmer.
Think of the layer-upon-layer of editors that exists in the NYT. And yet this “slipped” through?
Make no mistake – this was no mistake.
The cartoon is boneheadedly stupid in terms of international politics, but not particularly "anti-Semitic."
BTW, Hitler's dog was an all black Elsasser, not a German Shepherd.
I have zero respect for the NYT and I’m pro Israel, Netanyahu and Trump. Still, I’m not feeling the outrage, nor do I understand why it is anti-Semitic. Someone please explain to me as if I were 10.
Do a Google image search for Charlie Hebdo and you'll get lots of incredibly offensive cartoon images.
So one answer is simply that the standard is different in France and it was intended for the European audience and not us puritanical Americans.
Shouldn't the cartoon have depicted Trump as Bibi's poodle? Trump is also known to be Putin's poodle.
Someone drew it. - Who?
António Moreira Antunes
Sarah Jeong must have given the cartoon a thumbs-up.
Probably didn’t want to use a poodle because that trope belongs to W and Tony Blair.
I agree with Cernovich that if you want to discourage racism, or anti-Semitism, or sexism, you to actually name the perpetrators. Any time we are left with "It's an institutional problem" we are really sweeping it under the rug.
Does anyone seriously believe the Times didn't do this because they loved it and now are claiming it was bad judgment? They just got called out and now are acting like it was just a boo-boo.
"was offensive, and it was an error in judgment to publish it."
This is not an apology. They felt no need to apologize.
Seems to me that the cartoon is quite in line with standard bien-pensant thinking in Europe. Israel is generally loathed, and the U.S. (especially with Trump at the helm) is generally seen as a bully and a buffoon. This is everyday stuff, not remarkable at all.
I wish the media would stop using the term trope. It is a specialized technical term in rhetoric and poetics, not a general, widely understood
term. Most people do not understand its meaning. To apologize for using tropes is not to apologize. When congressperson Omar
apologized for using anti-semitic tropes, she did not apologize at all . Most likely she did not understand the meaning of tropes.
It’s all about holding the New York Times to their own standards for anybody to their right. It’s important to do it.
the direct communication from the NYT is just a tweet, and the AP reported on the tweet, and the NYT carried the AP article.
So basically the well worn path they've been following for a while now.
No doubt a lot of it is due to standard-issue European anti-semitism along with a generous helpin’ of Trump hatin’. But a big part of it is down to the gob-smacking historical illiteracy of Ben Rhodes archetypical 27 year-olds. They’re simply too ignorant to recognize that they were looking at something that echoes the worst Nazi propaganda.
Yes, Israel is Jewish. It is also a sovereign nation. Is it never to be criticized simply by virtue of its religion? Why is that ok? I seem to remember Tony Blair routinely being characterized as W.'s lapdog but no one ever got their panties in a bunch over that.
I used to think #1 in the Oppression Olympics or the most politically correct group that could never be criticized was a constant battle between the LGBTQSHHSJ2771@&7AJJS11 crowd and the Muslims.
Now I see, between this and the Ilhan Omar 'outrage', that #1 group is actually the Jews. Learn something new every day.
I don't care at all if someone is Jewish but don't tell me that fact alone makes them untouchable.
The Times says the image "included anti-Semitic tropes."
Yeah, but they did it to make Trump look bad, so it's all good.
As I wrote last night- the interesting thing is it appeared in the international edition rather than the domestic one. The cartoon was drawn for a specific audience. That it got coverage in the US wasn't expected.
I also like the passive voice used in the apology. Cartoons just appear on their own, like the weather.
Two women were walking their dogs together when they came upon a bar. One of the women told the other, "I want to have a drink."
The other woman replied, "we cant't, they won't let us take our dogs in there."
"Just watch," the first woman replied.
She then entered the bar with her dog.
The bartender told her, "lady, you can't have a dog in here."
The woman answered, "he's me seeing eye dog."
"Oh, OK," said the bartender, "no problem."
Seeing this the second woman entered the bar with her dog. The bartender once again objected, and the woman stated that it was her seeing eye dog.
The bartender started and exclaimed, "your seeing eye dog is a dachshund!"
To which the woman relied, "they gave me a dachshund!"
How did the NYT become so racist?
Matt Sablan said...
I think they saw Trump being made fun of and didn't think about anything else.
Oh for fucks sake Matt.
Just listen to the left these days. Who are their heroes? Who leads that party? Who are they allied with?
They hate Jews. Period.
The Spectator’s Dominic Green had a nice rewrite of the NYT retraction (sorry, I’m phone only this morning so you’ll have to google if you want a link):
“We ran a blatantly anti-Semitic cartoon. At a time when anti-Jewish violence and incitement is at levels not seen since 1945, we chose to place gutter racism on our pages. We did this because plenty of our editors share the prejudice of this cartoon; if in doubt, look at our unsigned editorials. We’re so soaked in this that none of us thought that it might be an error to publish a cartoon with clear precursors in fascist, communist, Arab nationalist and Islamist propaganda. Rather than explain this away in the passive tense, we’re going to name the editors who signed off on this cartoon, and fire them.”
The "why can't I criticize Israel like this" reminds me of the people who pretend to be confused when drawing an African American they dislike in a racist caricature and pretend to not understand the context. It is pleading ignorance with a sly wink. Either you understand certain imagery is deliberately evocative of racist imagery or you are completely unacclimated to modern realities. Now, you can choose to use the imagery anyway. But don't pretend you don't understand why other people might be offended your shock jock equivalent tactics offended.
It doesn't look antisemitic to me. Just X leads Y who can't see for himself.
It's not great geopolitical analysis though.
"So one answer is simply that the standard is different in France and it was intended for the European audience and not us puritanical Americans."
Althouse--the American puritanical tradition doesn't have anything to do with it. The NYT, which should know better, in its international edition (which used to be the International Herald Tribune) is just falling in line with the great European tradition of Jew-hatred. If they have different traditions in France, it is along the lines of, "You Jews line up here to get on those cattle cars." If you want a lesson on how the Jews were treated in France, go to the Musee Nissim de Camondo in the VIIIieme Arroundissment in Paris. Read about Comte Moise de Camondo, who he was, what what he did for France and its art history. Read about his son, Nissim, killed in WWI fighting for France, and his daughter, Beatrice, who was shipped off to Auschwitz, when none of her French friends would lift a finger to save her.
The standard is different in France. Thank heaven we have different standards here.
As antisemitism goes it is rather tame. But since Ron Paul would be taken to task for similar imagery, I shed no tears for the NYT being held to their own standards.
To which the woman relied, “They gave me a dachshund?"
That would have been funny.
Put me on the side of the ledger that doesn't understand the antisemitism of the cartoon.
I don't get the dog when they had a perfectly good blind leading the blind set up.
Yes, Israel is Jewish. It is also a sovereign nation. Is it never to be criticized simply by virtue of its religion? Why is that ok?
That would be the end on it if criticism of any liberal cause in which any Jewish person plays any prominent role, (cough cough, George Soros) wasn’t labeled as racist and anti Semitic by the same NYT
"We've seen the spike, quite frankly, since the election of President Trump," Rubin said.
Mostly by a Jewish guy in Israel making bomb threats (dual citizen? yup) and blacks in New York.
'Jews will not replace us' was the chant in Charlottesville in August 2017 and just the other day the president essentially said they were fair"
Both those statements are false, of course, but how is the fact of these creatures repeating those lies different in effect from the words actually being spoken? IOW, the people lying about Trump are causing the problem, though I'm not convinced "the problem" is any worse now than at any other recent time.
It is fine to criticize Israel. When you engage in dual loyalty smears or give conspiracy theorists that believe in the Jewish conspiracy, you might be getting into the anti Semitism part of the Venn diagram. Depicting Jews as animals is also a very touchy subject.
That dog doesn't actually look much like Netanyahu.
The London Sunday Times had a similar controversy over a Gerald Scarfe cartoon a few years back. The consensus seemed to be that because there was nothing explicitly identifying the Netanyahu figure as Jewish, the cartoon wasn't anti-Semitic. In the case of the recent cartoon, it may have been the yarmulke and the star that made the reaction more outspoken. Scarfe, the paper and the publisher still had to apologize.
But would a dachshund ever really be a Seeing-Eye dog?
maybe that was part of the point-- not only is Trump blind,
but too stupid to choose the right guide-- even his dog is
'handicapped' in regards to a proper overview
What is it Insty likes to say about Trump? Worst. Antisemite. Ever.
Dachshunds, BTW, are indeed stubborn beasts, also brave, loyal, and sociable.
That any historically and culturally informed person can question the motive and intent of this cartoon is beyond me; I haven't bothered myself about the New York Slimes in ages, but just HAD to go look at this one.
Narr
One of the benefits of free speech is that it encourages fools to out themselves
That or the artist needed a dog that fit the frame. I don't think most political cartoonists put a lot of thought into their work, which is why they just label everything.
I think the cartoon was based on a particular New York sensibility in which hot dogs, first known as dachshund sandwiches, are seen as particularly Jewish. Nedick's, a very popular hot dog place in New York, is Jewish and Hebrew National, an all-beef hot dog (which tastes great) is kosher. And also, dogs are seen as unclean, by Islam so you can't call hot dogs, "hot dogs" in certain Islamic countries.
Next this NYC person is a fan of rapper Snoop Doggy Dog who has a similar shaped dog / women in the back of the album Death Row cover.
Next this NYC person is very familiar with the way Orthodox Jews dress in dark suits and wear a head covering and regards that has ridiculous in itself.
Then Trump looks sort of like Kissinger in this cartoon and not like himself except for the hair reference. So I think it is partly a warmed-over Kissinger cartoon
So I think this is an older, lefty, anti-semite (Nedick's, Kissinger) with younger relatives who like Snoop Doggy Dog. And this person is familiar with recent Islamic attacks on "hot dogs." He might be even of the Islamic faith because who else would see being led by a dog as an easily recognizable insult? And this person lives as we all do in a barrage of images which he sorted out in this way. And it's incoherent so that may be why the NYT didn't recognize it as anti-semitic though it is an NYC sensibility
This is how the New York Times used to feel:
To say that increasing numbers of New Leftists, black militants and advocates of the Palestinian cause are not only anti‐Israeli and anti Zionist, but, more, are moving toward—or have already achieved— full‐fledged anti‐Semitism is clearly to use fighting words. Some distinc tions are in order. One may oppose Israeli policy, resist Zionism or criti cize worldwide Jewish support of Is rael without being anti‐Semitic. But when one draws on the age‐old hos tility to Jews to strengthen a political position, when one gives credence to the charge of a worldwide Jewish plot to rule, when one attacks those with whom one has political and eco nomic differences as Jews, when one implies that Jews are guilty of some primal evil, then one is guilty of anti Semitism, and one is engaged in the same racism that all decent men in sist on eliminating. - The Socialism of Fools, NYT 1971
I think that the yarmulke and traditional Jewish clothing, and portraying Netanyahu as a dog both cross the line they once drew. There are people shooting up synagogues and the NYT is portraying Jews in a way that Hitler would have been comfortable with.
Robert Flandrau:
First, Trump is being led about by a dog, with glasses indicating he is blind. Implication: the Jews are leading him about. Confirmation of this is his yarmulke, suggesting again he is under Jewish control
And portraying Jews as dogs is a standard trope. Hunt up imam tawhidi and his explanation.
This stuff is all over Europe. The NY Times International edition is just trying to catch up with the pack there. It is the 1930's all over again and THAT'S what happens when history is either no longer taught, or taught using books by Howard Zinn.
I love when the left is always shocked- shocked- that they are the anti-semite in the room.
worth a nice hearty bold and repeat
will the NYT do a cartoon of blind Islam being lead by a
vicious pit-bull in radical-cleric garb?
“Very inconvenient that this should happen right when they wanted to blame San Diego on Trump”
Inconvenient then that the killer turned out apparently to share the cartoon’s shared antisemitism and TDS. Another example of the left screaming about antisemitism on the right, only to have it, almost inevitably, descend on themselves on the left.
I think Nobody (note the capitalization) is headed in the right direction. The Left has been careful to separate anti-Israeli sentiment from outright anti-Semitism, and indeed many Jewish intellectuals and Jewish millennials have no issue with participating in anti-Israel organizations (see, for instance, the JVP) and the BDS movement, not seeing the trap into which they are charging headlong (or perhaps it's a case of "can I be on the last cattle car, please?") Other American Jews see the trap clearly, and maybe see the need to rein in their foolish co-religionists.
I also agree that putting a yarmulke on Trump's head runs this cartoon over a line that should not be crossed.
Don't overthink this. The Dachshund works compositionally. Just look at the seamless way Trump's arm, hand, and leash align with the dog's back. I think the choice was more for artistic than political reasons.
Easter celebrators.
It’s officially open Season.
"I should add that the cartoon is extremely well-drawn and eye-catching."
Yeah, I guess. And as an aside, those Hugo Boss Waffen-SS uniforms are rather fashionable.
A German Shepherd is thought of as a majestic, powerful dog. The cartoonist wanted to depict the Jew as low and slithering, hence the Dachsund. Nothing more complicated than that.
". I think the choice was more for artistic than political reasons."
It's a political cartoon, of course the choices made were political. That's kind of the idea.
Maybe it's just a matter of fit.
The cartoonist wanted to show Trump as a low-life schemer and a physically low dog fit the frame.
JamesK above says similarly. (All James are smart.)
Bottom line. The slimes at the Times are afraid of the Muslims. They aren’t afraid of the Jews or the Christians. Yet.
1. I'm confused. I thought Trump was Hitler, not a Jew. Can he be both?
I read image as having been done by a Franco-Algerian. The IHT (or INYT) is published from France. Muslims don't see Trump as Hitler. Hitler is good. Jews are bad, hence Trump as a Jew.
Franco-Algerian because of all the Muslims in the country, an ex-Algerian type would be most likely to be in a white collar French job
The Koran says dogs are unclean. Lots of Muslim insults around enemies as dogs.
Israelis are foreign invaders, cast out of Germany. Hence the Dachshund.
Bibi leads Donald. Obvious
2. I was struck by the NYT pointing the finger at the "other" INYT, yet Wiki points out that after the NYT bought ought WaPo's half of the IHT it:
"In October 2016, the newspaper (INYT) was fully integrated with its parent (NYT) and renamed The New York Times International Edition."
not seeing the trap into which they are charging headlong
IIRC, after the Russian revolution a council of revolutionary Jews was set up shut down the practice of the Jewish religion, including arresting rabbis, suppressing Zionism, and closing synagogues. The communists went after religion in general and the Jewish communists, of which there were many, did their part.
I suspect they are flying it up the flagpole to see if anyone salutes.
Yup. How much can they get away with? If the NY Post was smart front page. What were they thinking? The Times is not your friend.
This cartoon is simply a knock on Netanyahu and Trump on the heels of the recent news about them. There is nothing antisemitic about it at all unless of course you're lookin' for it and are short on genuine examples. A depiction of a Star of David does not equate to antisemitism. How 'bout some context?
If I just saw the isolated face of the humandog I frankly wouldn't know who it was; it's not a real good caricature of Bibi. Put a SoD on it and look at the whole picture and it becomes obvious. It's hanging from the dog part's neck. Where should it have been - hanging from the human part's ear?! The NYT is of course very interested in depicting Trump as inept and as a foreign policy idiot. Perfect, make him blind and give him a seeing eye dog to lead him around. Make it Netanyahu, since he just did N a big "favor." Put a yarmulke on Trump to emphasize how in thrall to N and Israel he (supposedly) is.
Bingo, you've got yourself a nice Trump/Netanyahu derogatory cartoon depicting N's trickery over the incompetent T. Sometimes a Star of David is just a Star of David.
Did the NYT actually apologize?
Others reported that "they apologized".
They may have but all I saw was them admitting it was offensive and that they removed it.
I didn't see "sorry" or "apologize" or "we regret the error" or anything else like that.
So, did they actually apologize?
The New York Times needs to stop putting garlic in its vagina.
Diversity breeds adversity. Here's to progress.
Never attribute to malice anything that can be explained by malice and incompetence.
They could have just portrayed the two men, but instead the diversitists at NYT took affirmative action to integrate, implicate Judaism, thus anti-Semitism.
If the cartoon were a simple if somewhat ham-handed comment on international relations, rather than yet another example of the antisemitism that has often led to mass murder, why did the NYT withdraw it?
The image of Trump morphs into an anti-Semitic caricature. I don't understand how it's possible to hate Trump for being both too pro-Israel and too anti-Semitic, but they do it. Fulbright and Ervin were shrewd and effective supporters of segregation and were celebrated for their wisdom and justice by the left. It's been done before.
I don't understand how it's possible to hate Trump for being both too pro-Israel and too anti-Semitic, but they do it.
The left can twist their hatred into any pretzel, and get away with it.
It's not really antisemitic, unless ANY criticism of ANYTHING Jewish qualifies.
The real problem is that it upsets the "Trump is a Nazi" narrative.
You have to begin to wonder if this overt anti-semitism in the Ny Times will begin to be a turn off for many jewish readers. This is the sort of jew baiting slurs you see routinely in Euro papers. La Monde and the Guardian spring to mind. I get they want to be cosmopolitan and all but appealing to anti-semites should be a no-go area for them or at least used to be.
The cartoon dovetails nicely with the statements by Congresswoman Omar about how the Jews are controlling the US Congress. That low life dog Netanyahu is leading Trump around by a leash. I saw an interesting article about not letting your dog lead you. "If you allow your dog to walk in front of you while on a lead you are reinforcing in the dog's mind that the dog is alpha over you because the leader always goes first." The Walk - Walking a Dog
Funny how we never see cartoons about Palestinians or their corrupt Arab leaders -- why is that? People who would never dare criticize the ignorance and insanity of the Arab world are so righteous when defending their unrelenting criticism of Israel and Jews.
We need another 'Draw Muhammad' day!
Criticism of Israel has become standard on the academic and foreign policy Left. While it is technically possible to be a critic of Israel and even anti-Zionist without being antisemetic, it's very hard to pull that out and there's NOBODY on the Left policing that line.
Mike
Chris Lopes,
First of all, the sentence you quote emphasizes relative, not absolute, importance. The cartoon has plenty of political content without every detail being political as such. Otherwise, please tell me the political message of why the dog is brown, the lower background is red slashes, and the leash is blue. That Bibi is portrayed as a dog is far more important than the breed. Don't overthink this.
If you can’t see this as well within the trope of Jewish conspiracy to control the world, lots of other people will.
Char Char contends: It's not really antisemitic, unless ANY criticism of ANYTHING Jewish qualifies.
It was meant to appeal to the Muslim population of Europe, to whom Jews are, in fact, dogs.
The right wing Identity politics cults like a John Burch Society cult leaders always create a world where the Jews are not the real Jews but imitation Jews, Ergo hating and killing them is acceptable and really their fault. But it’s still a Jew hating for no reason except getting away with pure evil.
"The left can twist their hatred into any pretzel, and get away with it."
The left AND LLR-left.
Traditional guy, you are quite a traditional liar. Why say "right wing identity politics cults" when the current anti-Semites are mostly leftists, like those in the Democratic Party, and the Fake Media such as NYT?
If you are going to create strawmen, traditionalguy, at least learn how to spell your fake news correctly. It was the John Birch Society. It was as much a "right wing identity politics cult" as the Southern Poverty Law Center. perhaps if you knew some history, you might be able to pull off your false arguments.
Hagar said...
BTW, Hitler's dog was an all black Elsasser, not a German Shepherd.
Elsasser, or Alsatian, is another name for German Shepard. Same breed.
About ten years ago there was an effort to determine the best joke from every country. The contribution from Germany was this:
An Alsatian hound goes into a telegraph office and says, "I want to send a telegram. I want it to say, 'Woof woof woof. Woof woof woof. Woof woof woof.'"
The clerk says, "That's only nine words. For the same price you can send ten."
Says the dog, "You mean, 'Woof woof woof. Woof woof woof. Woof woof woof woof?' That doesn't make any sense at all."
Muslims hate dogs. They regarded as unclean in Islamic cultures.
Tradguy: Barry Goldwater was a Bircher or Bircher sympathizer, wasn't he? And his father was born a Jew [coverted to Christianity].
It was a “dog whistle” to its Muslim readers.
It was a “dog whistle” to its Muslim readers.
caplight45 steps in with the le mot juste. Well done, sir or madam!
Elkh1...you are new to the 1500 year old Jew hating sport. The evil on the left is no worse than the evil on the right. And remember the Nazi Germans copied Michigan’s Henry Ford who was no leftist. And Lindbergh was not a leftist but he hated Jews with the best of them.
On second look:
I see flames in background.
Could artist be warning about conflagration if Trump follows Netanyahu blindly?
Then it could be pro-peace.
Unless you knew the people with the Bircher mind set in person all arguments making excuses for that cult are wishful thinking.Adding opposition to Communism does not make virulent Jew hating any better than a fatal disease.
According to this seemingly convincing analysis: http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2019/04/why-was-bibi-dachshund-in-cartoon.html, cartoonists have often used the dachshund to symbolize Germany. Therefore, “The dachshund was not a coincidence. Moreira wanted to again compare Israel to Nazi Germany.”
Tyrone Slothrop said...
Elsasser, or Alsatian, is another name for German Shepard. Same breed.
FWIW, the French refuse to call German Shepards, German Shepards.
They call them Alsatian Shepards, circa 1917
"I should add that the cartoon is extremely well-drawn and eye-catching." I agree with that. When I first saw it I thought "hmmm, well, that's probably offensive, but I'm not sure why." It probably uses tropes, but not obvious to me what they are so inclined to cut everyone some slack. Also kind of looks like Trump is wearing wayfarers (same as mine) - not necessarily blind - bu apparently Trump never wears sunglasses.
Yes, anti-semitism is rampant on left but not that interested in adopting the same "everything is a dog whistle" hysteria of those awful people.
I have zero respect for the NYT and I’m pro Israel, Netanyahu and Trump. Still, I’m not feeling the outrage, nor do I understand why it is anti-Semitic. Someone please explain to me as if I were 10.
In the Jerusalmem Post (https://www.jpost.com/International/New-York-Times-pathetic-excuse-for-printing-anti-Semitic-cartoon-opinion-588018):
Problem one is putting a yarmulke on the US president in a negative way. What is being said there? That he is secretly a Jew. Then making him blind, and having him led by Israel. That implies Israel controls US policy or controls America.
That is problem two. Then they put a dog leash with a Star of David, which is antisemitic in multiple ways.
Problems three and four. You’d think that after the Holocaust, any use of the Star of David would automatically raise questions in a newsroom.
But no. Then they put the Israeli prime minister’s face on a dog. On a dog. Problem number five.
So this cartoon wasn’t just mildly antisemitic. It wasn’t like “whoops.” It was deeply antisemitic.
Well, you are right. Elsasser, or Alsatian, is another name for German Shepherd, though Hitler's dog then is the only solid black Shepherd I have ever seen a picture of.
Anyway, the cartoon certainly is not either Jew or Israel friendly, but the main thing is animosity to the death of the two state idea and, of course, Trump.
The two state idea died with the election of Ariel Sharon decades ago, but some people have a real hard time letting go of it.
*Jerusalem*
other bete noires indulged:
https://twitchy.com/jacobb-38/2019/04/28/not-to-distract-from-your-shared-hatred-nbc-had-sally-yates-on-and-betcha-cant-guess-what-they-didnt-ask-her/
The only reason they apologized is because of the synagogue shooting yesterday. The optics weren't right.
They hired Sarah Jeong for Christ sake. The Times is a cesspit.
"New York Times says it is 'deeply sorry' for running anti-Semitic cartoon":
The Times apology came Sunday afternoon after it issued an earlier statement saying it was wrong to run a cartoon that contained "anti-Semitic tropes." But that statement did not contain any apology.
The new statement said: "We are deeply sorry for the publication of an anti-Semitic political cartoon last Thursday in the print edition of The New York Times that circulates outside of the United States, and we are committed to making sure nothing like this happens again."
"Such imagery is always dangerous, and at a time when anti-Semitism is on the rise worldwide, it's all the more unacceptable," it continued.
The paper said the decision to run the syndicated cartoon was made by a single editor working without adequate oversight.
"The matter remains under review, and we are evaluating our internal processes and training," said the statement. "We anticipate significant changes."
mockturtle said...
Tradguy: Barry Goldwater was a Bircher or Bircher sympathizer, wasn't he? And his father was born a Jew [coverted to Christianity].
**************
Judging from this article by Bill Buckley, Goldwater was neither a member or a sympathizer, but politically he felt he could not denounce the society. Instead he let Buckley specifically tee up an attack against its founder and leader, Robert Welch:
https://www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/goldwater-the-john-birch-society-and-me/
"We resolved that conservative leaders should do something about the John Birch Society. An allocation of responsibilities crystallized.
"Goldwater would seek out an opportunity to dissociate himself from the “findings” of the Society’s leader, without, however, casting any aspersions on the Society itself."
[Buckley opined in NR:]
"How can the John Birch Society be an effective political instrument while it is led by a man whose views on current affairs are, at so many critical points . . . so far removed from common sense? That dilemma weighs on conservatives across America. . . . The underlying problem is whether conservatives can continue to acquiesce quietly in a rendition of the causes of the decline of the Republic and the entire Western world which is false, and, besides that, crucially different in practical emphasis from their own."
"In response, National Review received the explicit endorsement of Senator Goldwater himself, who wrote a letter we published in the following issue:"
"I think you have clearly stated the problem which Mr. Welch’s continued leadership of the John Birch Society poses for sincere conservatives. . . . Mr. Welch is only one man, and I do not believe his views, far removed from reality and common sense as they are, represent the feelings of most members of the John Birch Society. . . . "
**********************************
So...never a JBS member or declared sympathizer, just another pol unwilling to roil his base until pushed to do so, and then making sure he decapitated the shepherd and not the flock--- who in the end ran around like headless sheep and saw their influence wane.
Mission accomplished.
( I used to live in Belmont, MA, once the headquarters of the John Birch Society.
(Ironically it's today one of the most lily-white and liberal of Boston suburbs.)
@alanc709....I know more about history of the virulent disease of Jew Hating than you can ever make up defense theories for. And guess what. Calling in attacks on me from your secret buddies is not going to shut me up. If the Jews can take that kind of false accusation crap, then so can their supporters.
So...if one wanted to make the point, in non-anti-Semitic cartoon form, that US policy is too pro-Israel, how would that be done?
Or is such a thought not even permitted?
The depiction of Bibi gets a little too close to the "hook-nosed Jew " caricature.
Israel is considered by some to be a smaller version of Nazi Germany. The Dachshund, historically used to represent Germany, is a reference to this as opposed to the larger German Shepard.
Adding the skullcap and the star bring a negative portrayal of the Jewish religion into the mix.
Anti-Semitic, yes, but slyly so.
So...if one wanted to make the point, in non-anti-Semitic cartoon form, that US policy is too pro-Israel, how would that be done?
Not by portraying President Trump as a Jew being blindly led by a Jewish dog.
Or is such a thought not even permitted?
Obviously the thought is permitted. No one has tried to murder the cartoonist, in marked contrast to cartoonists who have raised issues about the Prophet Mohammed using pen and ink.
So...if one wanted to make the point, in non-anti-Semitic cartoon form, that US policy is too pro-Israel, how would that be done?
I have no idea, as I am not a cartoonist, but it's possible to criticize US policies toward Israel, or Israel itself, without descending to the level of this cartoon. Roger Farmer has done that here, and though I find his take a bit over the top and selectively critical, I don't think he's at all anti-Semitic.
What makes the cartoon anti-Semitic, as opposed to just critical of Trump's policies, or critical of Israel, is that it plays on two 'tropes': (1) The Jew as a lowly animal (the Nazis depicted Jews as rats; as I said above, the dachsund is a low, slithering sort of dog, and, as was also pointed out, dogs are anathema to Arabs); and (2) The Jew as controlling and manipulative.
The more common term for the breed is schäfer, or schaefer, from schaf - sheep, but they are really guard dogs rather than herders.
Anti-Semitic, yes, but slyly so.
Just like "separation of church and state". Not separation of mosque and state, or temple and state, or synagogue and state, or even chamber, perhaps den, and state. A thinly veiled contempt for Christians.
"Hitler's dog then is the only solid black Shepherd I have ever seen a picture of."
Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but there are plenty of solid black German Shepherds. Completely acceptable in the breed standard.
That dog also looks worm-like. Der Stürmer was fond of that depiction of Jews. https://research.calvin.edu/german-propaganda-archive/sturmer.htm
Dachshunds (Dackel, Teckel) are themselves proof that at least some Germans have a sense of humor!
Can't wait to tell the wife the two dog jokes I learned today.
Narr
I knew hanging out here would pay off
According to Dennis Prager
"The Jews are the world’s canary in the mine
When Jews are murdered, it is a warning to decent non-Jews that they are next. Because Western nations dismissed Nazi anti-Semitism as the Jews’ problem, 50 million non-Jews ended up dying. If the world dismisses Ahmadinejad’s Iran as primarily the Jewish state’s problem, non-Jews will suffer again. Jew-haters (or, if you will, Jewish state-haters) begin with Jews but never end with them."
They always start with Jews. Be worried.
“Well, you are right. Elsasser, or Alsatian, is another name for German Shepherd, though Hitler's dog then is the only solid black Shepherd I have ever seen a picture of.”
Grew up next to one. Father there was a pilot, and so would be gone for a couple days at a time. Hence the German Shepherd to protect the mother and kids. The dog, Ace, was jet black, almost 100 lbs, and seems to have gained great joy at sneaking up on anyone visiting, which I probably did most days, with the boy next door six months younger than I. Ace would suddenly appear, inches away, seemingly out of nowhere, and bark aggressively. No doubt that he quickly learned that I was no threat. No matter, I could expect to be intimidated by him, year in and year out. Imagine my surprise one day, when our female Siberian Husky defended her food against Ace, who was probably almost twice her weight at the time. Ace eventually ended up with hip dysplasia, and his replacement was a more typical German Shepherd who didn’t seem to have near as much fun terrorizing the neighbor kids.
Blogger EDH said...
Yesterday, during the continuous coverage shortly after of the Synagogue shooting, Fox News invited a guest who tried to link a rise in anti-Semitism to Trump and was cut-off.
Did you by any slight chance learn the motive for the Synagogue shooter ?
He is a male nursing student who is trying to stimulate anti-gun actions by killing people. He hates Jews and says that Trump is a Jew and he hates him too. His hero is the New Zealand killer.
These people are seriously crazy but Trump has zero to do with it,. no matter the desires of the NYT,
Just ONE MORE REASON to despise and detest and distrust the NYT. Not that I NEEDED another.
Blogger traditionalguy said...
The right wing Identity politics cults like a John Burch Society cult leaders always create a world where the Jews are not the real Jews but imitation Jews, Ergo hating and killing them is acceptable and really their fault. But it’s still a Jew hating for no reason except getting away with pure evil.
I knew lots of members of the JBS. The western Director, John Rousselot, lived across the street. I had friends who joined and my closest friend was thinking of it and I dissuaded him. I thought some nut was going to take a shot at Eisenhower and he would be stuck with a membership.
I never heard any concerns about Jews, although there was still some anti-Semitism going back to the 40s. I don't think the JBS was anti-Semitic from anything I heard.
Bret Stephens opines:
A Despicable Cartoon in The Times
The paper of record needs to reflect deeply on how it came to publish anti-Semitic propaganda.
"As prejudices go, anti-Semitism can sometimes be hard to pin down, but on Thursday the opinion pages of The New York Times international edition provided a textbook illustration of it.
Except that The Times wasn’t explaining anti-Semitism. It was purveying it..."
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/28/opinion/cartoon-nytimes.html
As of this writing, there are 564 comments, broken down into three categories: NYT Picks (ordered by most recent, Reader Picks (ordered by likes) and All (ordered by most recent).
The most recent NYT Pick, which doesn't (by far) have the most likes in that category:
stevevelo
Milwaukee, WI 2h ago
Haven’t seen the cartoon, but I’m not totally surprised. The lack of judgement that the editor revealed is part of a more widespread issue: the obsession of TNYT with appealing cool, “woke”, politically correct, and millennial. Under the leadership of the previous and current publishers, the nature of The Times’ coverage has changed significantly. It has moved from basically liberal, with a sincere (but not always successful) effort to uphold traditional journalistic norms of objectivity regarding story selection, editing, selection of illustrations, prominence of position, etc., to overt, open, politically motivated bias in coverage. As someone who began working at the NYT when Orville Dreyfus was the publisher, I’m very disappointed. The standards of a great American institution have been diluted with pop culture, and the institution that broke Watergate and countless other nationally significant stories appears to be attempting to convert itself into a daily version of Vanity Fair.
13 Replies 132 Recommended
2 from the 3 most recent replies:
"Earth 1h ago
I completely agree. The fact that so many of its editors are under 40 also reflects what you write of, and their lack of historical knowledge and experience, and the perspective it offers gets manifested in such acts of irresponsibility and bad judgement.
Kathy commented 1 hour ago
@stevevelo
So true, thanks for explaining why I'm not renewing next month. Diluted with pop culture not to mention too many articles on the so-called microaggressions on women, racial minorities, and the disproportionate attention doled out to sexual orientations and gender identification. It's unreadable at this point."
I certainly agree (on most of their political articles and editorials).
NYT lives in an echo chamber where Jew Hating is de rigueur, simples.
My historical impression is that NYT owners were Jewish!?
Not correct?
Yes the schulzbergers but they are extremely secular in their outlook.
From an article written in 1966 -- John Birch Society Charged with ‘contributing to Anti-semitism’:
The John Birch Society which denies it is anti-Jewish was charged here today with “contributing to anti-Semitism” by officials of the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith at the annual meeting of the organization held in the Waldorf Astoria Hotel.
Benjamin R. Epstein, ADL national director, and Arnold Forster, general counsel, reported that anti-Semitism is “an inherent problem” of the Birch Society which “it has made excuses for but failed to exorcise over the whole of the Society’s seven years.” The Birch Society’s involvements in anti-Semitism, the report declared, are revealed by the following:
1. Birch Society American Opinion bookstores in states across the nation stock and sell the writings of known anti-Semitic propagandists.
2. The Birch magazine, “American Opinion, ” has as a regular correspondent Eric D. Butler, recognized for more than 25 years “as one of Australia’s leading anti-Semites.”
3. Birch leader Robert Welch, on one of twelve record albums being sold by the Society, dismisses what he calls “the whole anti-Semitic thing” as being created by the Communists” who also “created Hitler and drugged him and the Nazi Party into persecution of the Jews. Revilo P. Oliver, associate editor of “American Opinion” says it is a lie that Hitler killed six million Jews.
4. The Birch Society has been infiltrated by anti-Semites. It has a “blind spot” about anti-Semitic activities “even when such activities are a matter of public knowledge.”
That's seems like near beer, they couldn't come up with links. Also Buckley underestimated how Soviet designed educational templates would influence education.
No links because that's the exact article as written in 1966.
Theres a little more to go on here:
http://digifindingaids.cjh.org/?pID=1287902
But the adl has become an utter prog shill at least by the late 90s
The John Birch Society which denies it is anti-Jewish was charged here today with “contributing to anti-Semitism” by officials of the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai B’rith at the annual meeting of the organization held in the Waldorf Astoria Hotel.
Maybe there was some but I didn't see it. I did not study their literature.
I do see some in the Unz Review and American Conservative but don't read them much,
Has anyone considered that the dachshund might be a garlic-sniffing dog?
Wow, you are really tone deaf on this one, Althouse. The thing you most want to blather about is "can anyone explain to me why the breed chosen as the Seeing-Eye dog is a dachshund?"
You really DO need to 'get woke'.
"So...if one wanted to make the point, in non-anti-Semitic cartoon form, that US policy is too pro-Israel, how would that be done?"
I don't know. How about these:
Have Trump on a Monopoly Board on Boardwalk handing Bibi a "Get Out of Jail Free" Card?
Have Trump and Bibi singing a duet on bar stools with a view of the UN while Schumer, Pelosi, Biden, AOC, and Omar look in from the street?
Have Trump and Bibi doing a fist bump in the Oval Office with a portrait of Obama on the Wall?
Have the US embassy in Tel Aviv closed up with a "Gone to Jerusalem" sign outside?
Have a picture of the US Embassy in Jerusalem with a big "Coming Soon: Trump Tower Jerusalem" next to it?
Have Trump and Bibi looking at a Google map with "Palestine" crossed out and "Israel" penciled in?
Have Trump and Bibi looking admiringly at a wall on the West Bank?
There are lots of ways to make that point without Trump wearing a yarmulke and Bibi being portrayed as a seeing eye dog with the Star of David around his neck.
The New York Times is a disgrace. They knew they messed up because they wouldn't dare print that cartoon in the US edition. They might as well have run an editorial decrying the influence on Trump of an international conspiracy to control the global flow of capital by a shadowy group based in Zurich and Israel.
ALTHOUSE says: "..So one answer is simply that the standard is different in France and it was intended for the European audience and not us puritanical Americans."...Oh, now I see, this is just the first signal of a new 'Athhouse the Asshole' site. Yes, delete my comment, I'd consider that an honor.
The cartoonist has painted nazi in Israeli uniforms and Jews with kaffiyehs is that subtle?
caplight45 said...It was a “dog whistle” to its Muslim readers.
--
In which case, the trope would be Bibi drawn as blowing the whistle and Trump as the dog....perhaps a lapdog.
This cartoon manages to offend without clearly conveying whatever message it has.
Have Trump and Bibi looking at a Google map with "Palestine" crossed out and "Israel" penciled in?
Why not? Two thousand years ago (okay, 1950 years ago) the Romans crossed out Judea and wrote in Palestine.
So...if one wanted to make the point, in non-anti-Semitic cartoon form, that US policy is too pro-Israel, how would that be done?
I don’t know. Is it possible to criticize George Soros without being antisemitic? Not according to the left. This is about Rules for Radicals. They set the standard that it’s not just what you mean, but how people take what you say that matters. That whatever the intent of the creators of The Dukes of Hazard, the Confederate Flag on the top of that car was a call to bring back slavery, etc, etc, etc.
Congregation Chabad Shooting Suspect Refers To Trump As A ‘Zionist, Jew-Loving, Anti-White, Traitorous C**S***Er’ -Red State
The New York Times blamed Sarah Palin for the Gabby Giffords shooting because she used a metaphor.
I think that I did once see a movie with a superhero with a great superpower. Whenever she was involved in something, she always got incredibly lucky and so the situation always resolved in her favor. That’s the distilled essence of every literary hero ever, except the tragic ones.
I wonder if people on the left will notice that they have stopped calling Trump a Nazi and have started calling him Jewish.
It's a similar reaction neonazis had to Reagan in the 80s
https://mobile.twitter.com/charliekirk11/status/1122629431942475776
His name is Antonio Moreira Atunes, from Espresso, a Portuguese newspaper, see: https://m.jpost.com/Israel-News/Cartoonist-behind-NYT-caricature-has-history-of-controversy-588074
Automatic_Wing said...
So...if one wanted to make the point, in non-anti-Semitic cartoon form, that US policy is too pro-Israel, how would that be done?
Or is such a thought not even permitted?
4/28/19, 5:19 PM
I understand your problem. It would be easier for you to make this point of yours if it were true.
gg6 said...
ALTHOUSE says:
Blah blah blah is what she says. Don't even worry about it. It's her blond bimbo act. Any other woman, if you order her to take off her clothes, she knows she's about to get f--ked. Althouse would be like, oh my God, my clothes must have bed bugs! How did he know? I better take them off right away! Thank you sir! I'm so grateful! How can I make it up to you? (bats eyes)
In other words, she likes to play dumb. The trouble is she's so good at it you can't always tell she's acting. Maybe she is an acting. Not all professors are all that smart.
I think the NY Times greatest frustration was the timing of this comic couldn't come at a worst time after the shooting in the synagog. Its hard to blame trump for anti-semitism when he's being depicted a lapdog of Israel. Dammit!
Blogger Hagar said...
The cartoon is boneheadedly stupid in terms of international politics, but not particularly "anti-Semitic."
BTW, Hitler's dog was an all black Elsasser, not a German Shepherd.
Elsasssar means Alsatian in German. Alsatian is juat another name for the breed commonly known as German Shepherd.
they did another cartoon with bibi as a rabbi with a tablet emblazoned with the Israeli flag,
Post a Comment