"New York City’s Democratic primary voters overwhelmingly believe that Israel is 'committing genocide' in Gaza..."

"... and that the United States should stop arming the Jewish state, according to new polling from a pro-Palestinian group.... Asked if the city should 'enforce the arrest warrant' against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, which Democratic mayoral nominee Zohran Mamdani supports, 63% of primary voters said yes."

Semafor reports, in "Poll: New York Dems side with Mamdani on Israel, Netanyahu."

"We’re not at war with Iran. We’re at war with Iran’s nuclear program," said JD Vance.

Quoted in "Vance says U.S. 'not at war with Iran, we're at war with Iran's nuclear program'/President Donald Trump said Saturday night that the U.S. had dropped bombs on three Iranian nuclear sites, the first time the U.S. has directly attacked Iran" (NBC News).

I'm interested in that rhetorical device: "We’re not at war with Iran. We’re at war with Iran’s nuclear program." 

I believe it's called paradiastole — or redescription. Other examples: 

George W. Bush, 2003: "We’re not occupying Iraq. We’re liberating it."

Barack Obama, 2013: "This is not a war on terror. It’s a campaign against specific networks like al-Qaeda."

Bill Clinton, 1999: "This is not a war. It’s a humanitarian intervention."

Benjamin Netanyahu, 2014: "We’re not fighting the Palestinian people. We’re fighting Hamas.”

Ronald Reagan, 1980s: "We’re not waging war against Nicaragua. We’re supporting freedom fighters."

"President Donald Trump on Tuesday proposed moving Gazans to a 'good, fresh, beautiful piece of land' in another country, offering a vision..."

"... of mass displacement likely to inflame sentiments in the Arab world as he welcomed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to the White House. Trump’s proposal was likely to provoke a furious reaction from many Palestinians as well as their Arab allies in the region, since it suggested permanently removing Gaza’s 2.2 million residents from Palestinian territory and settling them outside of their land. In saying that the Palestinians would not return to Gaza, Trump did not specify who would ultimately control the territory. But an annexation of Gaza has long been a goal of Israel’s far right, which has sought to fully expel Palestinians from Palestinian territory...."

From "Trump proposes permanent displacement of Gazans as he welcomes Netanyahu to White House/The two leaders were set to focus on the tenuous ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, relocating Palestinians, rebuilding Gaza and normalizing relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia" (WaPo).

"The damage is so severe, we are telling drivers that unless it is an emergency, all roads in Western North Carolina should be considered closed."

Said a spokesman for the North Carolina Department of Transportation, quoted in "More Than 400 Roads Closed in North Carolina After Damage From Helene/The closures, including on two interstates, left motorists scrambling for options" (NYT).

Why isn't the hurricane damage the top story right now? That story isn't linked on the NYT home page.

I can't help feeling that the NYT is trying to protect the Biden/Harris administration from suffering political damage (like what happened to George W. Bush over Katrina).

The top of the home page is dominated by Israel's wars: "Why the World’s Biggest Powers Can’t Stop a Middle East War/The United States’ ability to influence events in the Middle East has waned, and other major nations have essentially been onlookers," "Israel Keeps Up Strikes Against Hezbollah in Lebanon/The Israeli military said it had hit dozens of Hezbollah targets, a day after deadly strikes near Beirut. Israel killed the group’s leader on Friday," "Having ignored allies and defied critics, Benjamin Netanyahu is basking in a rare triumph. Having ignored allies and defied critics, Benjamin Netanyahu is basking in a rare triumph," "Iran projected caution after Israel’s killing of Hassan Nasrallah and bombings in Beirut," "Despair, Celebration and Shock Follows News of Nasrallah’s Death in Beirut," and "A Decimated Hezbollah Is a Serious Blow to Iran." 

Six stories! Important, though, and there's a lot of depth to those stories, including very new material.

But the next set of stories is the old 2024 presidential campaign:

"I have a message for the tyrants of Tehran: If you strike us we will strike you."

"There is no place in Iran that long arm of Israel cannot reach, and that is true of the entire Middle East.”

Said Benjamin Netanyahu, speaking to the U.N., quoted in "Netanyahu Gives No Ground in Address at U.N./The Israeli leader made no mention of moving toward cease-fires in Lebanon, where conflict with the Iranian-backed Hezbollah militia has spiraled, or in Gaza" (NYT).

He also criticized the U.N. itself as a “swamp of antisemitic bile” and said its members concern for Gaza was motivated not by humanitarianism but by dislike of Jews.

“It’s not about Gaza,” he said of criticism over the last year of his government’s handling of the war. “It’s about Israel. It has always been about Israel. About Israel’s very existence.”

How can we simultaneously believe in the resurrection of Joe Biden and in the legitimacy of depriving him of the nomination he won in the primaries?

I open the NYT this morning — it's 3 a.m. — and see this:

 

Biden isn't sleeping in the middle of the day on a beach in Delaware, he's working — if not around the clock, against the clock.

The last couple weeks I'd been fretting about whether we even had a President at the moment and fantasizing about asking Kamala Harris how she could justify refraining from using the 25th Amendment to fill the vacuum. If it was proper to engage in the bold strategy to displace him as her party's candidate, why is it acceptable to stand by and do nothing when you are the one with the power to oust him from the presidency? 

Maybe it's because of questions like mine that the NYT concocted the headline "Biden Works Against the Clock as Violence Escalates in the Middle East" and installed it at the top of the front page alongside that somber photo of the elderly man's serious, determined face. I read the subheadline and wonder if any newsworthy story even occurred: "President Biden is beginning to acknowledge that he is simply running out of time to help forge a cease-fire and hostage deal with Hamas, his aides say. And the risk of a wider war has never looked greater." That's a well-known, persistent condition. 

"Netanyahu 'peed on my leg,' Obama replied, according to two people familiar with the exchange..."

"... who spoke on the condition of anonymity to disclose a private conversation. The moment [in 2014] was emblematic of a dynamic that is culminating in the bitter debates over Israel now erupting across the American political landscape. Over the past 16 years, Netanyahu has departed sharply from his predecessors’ studious bipartisanship to embrace Republicans and disdain Democrats, an attitude increasingly mirrored in each party’s approach to Israel...."

From "Netanyahu’s split with Biden and the Democrats was years in the making/The Israeli leader’s longtime strategy of aligning with the GOP has helped shatter the American consensus behind Israel" (WaPo).

"If we have to fight with our fingernails, then we’ll do what we have to do."

From "Biden-Netanyahu rift causes ‘tremendous anger’ in Washington/US fears its goals for Gaza — freeing hostages and aiding Palestinians — do not align with Israeli PM’s desire for political survival and an invasion of Rafah" (London Times):

Biden has reiterated that America’s support to Israel remains “ironclad”, but has warned Jerusalem against a full-scale land invasion of Rafah, fearing it would lead to a civilian bloodbath. Israel insists that the operation will go ahead and is necessary to find and kill the architects of the October 7 attacks.

It then emerged that the US paused a shipment of weapons to Israel last week, consisting of 1,800 2,000lb bombs and 1,700 500lb bombs. The reaction from Jerusalem was swift. “If we have to fight with our fingernails, then we’ll do what we have to do,” a senior government official told Reuters.

On Wednesday Biden doubled down in an interview with CNN, saying for the first time that he would halt shipments of American weapons if Netanyahu went ahead with the operation. “I made it clear that if they go into Rafah … I’m not supplying the weapons that have been used historically to deal with Rafah, to deal with the cities — that deal with that problem,” he said.

"You have to finish up your war. You have to get it done. We have to get to peace. We can’t have this going on."

Said Donald Trump, quoted in "Trump’s Call for Israel to ‘Finish Up’ War Alarms Some on the Right/Recent remarks he made urging an end to the Gaza conflict, with no insistence on freeing Israeli hostages first, were another departure from conservatives’ support for Benjamin Netanyahu" (NYT).

"Alarms Some on the Right" says the headline, but it must also alarm the Biden team:

"The ability to spot danger in advance and prepare for it is the test of a body’s functioning."

"The Jewish nation has never excelled at foreseeing danger. We were surprised again and again—and the last time was the most awful one. That won’t happen under my leadership. This is what the state of Israel expects from me, and this is what I’ll do."

Netanyahu once said, quoted by Yair Rosenberg in "The End of Netanyahu/He sold Israelis a story about their safety. It turned out not to be true" (The Atlantic).

Israelis do not forgive failures to secure their safety. Golda Meir left politics after the debacle of the 1973 Yom Kippur War, in which Israel lost nearly 3,000 soldiers following a surprise Egyptian and Syrian attack. Her name is reviled by some in the country to this day. But what happened on October 7, 2023, was worse than what happened on October 6, 1973. Meir lost soldiers—people who had purposely put their lives on the line. Netanyahu lost civilians—the people the state and its soldiers were supposed to protect....  In the end, the man known as “Mr. Security” failed by his own standard, and he failed to fulfill the fundamental expectation of his fellow citizens.....

"President Biden landed in Israel... after a deadly explosion at a hospital in the Gaza Strip left Palestinians and Israelis trading blame...."

"Neither side’s account could be independently verified, and the cause of the blast and its death toll remained unclear. During an appearance with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel, Mr. Biden appeared to endorse Israel’s denial of responsibility, saying: 'Based on what I’ve seen, it appears as though it was done by the other team, not you.' It was not clear from his comments whether U.S. intelligence agencies have independently validated Israel’s claim.... Rarely has an overseas presidential expedition been so uncertain even in its itinerary at the time of takeoff, and so freighted with jeopardy both political and physical...."

The NYT reports.

"Every Hamas member is a dead man. Hamas is ISIS, and we will crush and eliminate it just as the world crushed and eliminated ISIS."

Said Benjamin Netanyahu, quoted in "Israel’s New Unity Government Pledges to ‘Crush’ Hamas After forming a wartime cabinet, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and a top rival, Benny Gantz, presented a united front to the Israeli people. Mr. Netanyahu also detailed more of the atrocities he said Hamas terrorists had committed" (NYT).

"President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia has long cast himself as a friend of Israel and the Jewish people."

"He helped establish visa-free travel between Russia and Israel in 2008, presided over the construction of a sprawling Moscow Jewish Museum in 2012 and, side by side with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Jerusalem in 2020, unveiled a memorial to the victims of Nazi Germany’s siege of Leningrad.... Instead, Mr. Putin’s spokesman on Monday struck a neutral stance.... On Russian state television and in the pro-Kremlin blogosphere, commentators reacted to the attack on Israel with thinly veiled glee, casting it as a revelation of Western weakness and as the start of a war that could sap Western support for Ukraine.... There are clear geopolitical reasons for Mr. Putin’s shift on Israel. In the Middle East, where Russia has long tried to play a kingmaker role and build relations with all major powers, Moscow now finds itself beholden to Iran — Israel’s bitter enemy — as one of its primary arms suppliers for the war in Ukraine.... Mr. Putin appears stung that Israel and Jewish leaders around the world are not backing his false narrative about Ukraine’s being run by 'Nazis.' In recent months, he has repeatedly lashed out at President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine for heading a Nazi government despite being Jewish. In June, Mr. Putin claimed that his 'many Jewish friends' had told him that Mr. Zelensky was 'a disgrace to the Jewish people.'..."

I'm reading "Putin Offers Muted Response to Attack on Israel. That Speaks Volumes. Vladimir Putin has long projected friendly ties to Israel. But his silence since Saturday’s assault illustrates how the war in Ukraine has strained the relationship between the two countries" (NYT).

Putin is in a complex position here. If his reaction is "muted," perhaps that's a sign that he is deeply engaged in calculating how Russia can play out its role. We're told that Putin seems to experience "frustration that Israel has not endorsed his rationale" for invading Ukraine and that "Netanyahu’s government has been cautious in its support for Ukraine." 

"Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said 'we are at war, and we will win it'..."

"... as the country’s air force began striking Hamas targets in Gaza on Saturday, in response to a surprise assault on the 50th anniversary of the start of the 1973 Yom Kippur war. Hamas militants infiltrated Israeli territory from the Gaza Strip — including by paraglider and over the sea — and launched more than 2,200 rockets, Israeli military leaders said...."

The Washington Post reports.

"Prime Minister Yair Lapid of Israel conceded Israel’s election on Thursday evening to Benjamin Netanyahu, paving the way for him to return as prime minister..."

"... at the helm of one of the most right-wing governments in Israeli history.... The far right’s strong showing was linked to fears among right-wing Jews about perceived threats to Israel’s Jewish identity and to their personal safety. A wave of interethnic riots in May 2021 unsettled their sense of security, a feeling that was compounded months later by the inclusion — for the first time in Israeli history — of an Arab party in the coalition government...."

The NYT reports.

"Beyond Mr. Netanyahu, the election is also a referendum on the kind of society Israelis seek to build."

"His coalition partners include ultra-Orthodox lawmakers who oppose teaching math and English to their children, and far-right settlers who frequently antagonize Israel’s Arab minority and seek to remove checks and balances on the parliamentary process. To Mr. Netanyahu’s backers, his victory would shore up Israel’s Jewish character. It would reassure certain right-wing Jewish Israelis who fear that the unprecedented involvement of an Arab party in the departing government has threatened the country’s Jewish identity and endangered their personal safety. To his opponents, a win for Mr. Netanyahu would endanger the integrity of Israeli democracy — particularly after Mr. Netanyahu’s allies announced plans for sweeping judicial reform — and make it even harder for the country’s Jewish and Arab communities to get along."

From "Here’s what’s at stake as Israelis cast their ballots" (NYT)(Netanyahu, the current opposition leader, faces "the governing alliance of right-wing, left-wing and centrist parties that share little beyond their opposition to the former prime minister").

"Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was indicted on corruption charges on Thursday..."

"The decision announced by Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit was the first of its kind against a serving Israeli prime minister and represented Netanyahu's gravest crisis of his lengthy political career. He was charged with breach of trust and fraud in all three corruption cases against him, as well as bribery in one of the investigations, according to a charge sheet released by the Justice Ministry.... He is under no legal obligation to resign after being charged. The opening of a trial could be delayed for months by a new election and any moves by the right-wing prime minister to seek parliamentary immunity from prosecution."

Reuters reports.

"Many presidents have used their foreign policy power for political or personal advantage. Most recently, President Barack Obama..."

"... misused his power in order to take personal revenge against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. In the last days of his second term, Obama engineered a one-sided UN Security Council resolution declaring that Israel's control over the Western Wall -- Judaism's holiest site -- constitutes a 'flagrant violation of international law.' Nearly every member of Congress and many in his own administration opposed this unilateral change in our policy, but Obama was determined to take revenge against Netanyahu, whom he despised. Obama committed a political sin by placing his personal pique over our national interest, but he did not commit an impeachable offense. Nor did President George H. W. Bush commit an impeachable offense when he pardoned Caspar Weinberger and others on the eve of their trials in order to prevent them from pointing the finger at him."

From "Impeachers Searching for New Crimes" by Alan Dershowitz (at Gatestone Institute).

AND: It would be great if we could just follow a sort of golden rule: Impeach a President you hate only if you would impeach a President you love for doing the same thing.

PLUS: I read my golden rule out loud to Meade and he said "Impeach unto others as you would have others impeach unto you."

"Secretary of State Mike Pompeo delivered a sobering assessment of the prospects of the Trump administration’s long-awaited Middle East peace plan in a closed-door meeting with Jewish leaders..."

"... saying 'one might argue' that the plan is 'unexecutable' and it might not 'gain traction.' He expressed his hope that the deal isn’t simply dismissed out of hand. 'It may be rejected. Could be in the end, folks will say, "It’s not particularly original, it doesn’t particularly work for me," that is, "it’s got two good things and nine bad things, I’m out,"' Pompeo said in an audio recording of the private meeting obtained by The Washington Post.... 'I get why people think this is going to be a deal that only the Israelis could love,' he said. 'I understand the perception of that. I hope everyone will just give the space to listen and let it settle in a little bit.'... Pompeo, unlike previous secretaries of state, is not overseeing the peace effort... [Jared] Kushner, a real estate scion from New Jersey, and [Jason] Greenblatt, the former chief legal officer for Trump and the Trump Organization, have led the initiative since the president took power. The two men, both practicing Orthodox Jews, did not come in with political experience but have shared a long interest in and connection to Israel.... [After Pompeo's meeting with Jewish leaders,] Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu failed to form a governing coalition and Israel’s parliament voted to dissolve itself, sending the country back to elections in September. Now, if the White House wants to avoid rolling out a peace plan during a sensitive election campaign period for Netanyahu, it will have to wait until at least November, when... the Trump administration will be stepping up its own reelection campaign...."

From "Exclusive: Pompeo delivers unfiltered view of Trump’s Middle East peace plan in off-the-record meeting" (WaPo)(audio at the link).

Do you think that's something Pompeo wanted to get out? Should we presume one of the "Jewish leaders" leaked it? What's the motivation? If Pompeo wanted it out, is it that he believes Kushner has handled it badly and wants the blame to go where it belongs? It seems that failure of the plan is predictable, but why get the failure process going in advance? To make the collapse less sudden?

The highest-rated comment at WaPo is:

What a bunch of morons. Seriously. What did they think would happen when they moved the embassy to Jerusalem? Why did they think prior presidents didn't do that? And now they think they can slide in with a peace plan.

Was never a big fan of the Three Stooges.

So who linked the recording?

How did the NYT international edition happen to publish an anti-Semitic cartoon?

Someone drew it. - Who?

Someone colored it. - Who?

Someone laid it out. - Who?

I’m sure the media will be all over this, right? https://t.co/S3UECess84

— Mike Cernovich (@Cernovich) April 28, 2019

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.

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.

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!

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."