Congratulations, New York Times! Bravo! It has taken 90 years, but you may have finally outdone your support for Joseph Stalin and his Ukrainian genocide. Maybe this coverage will get you another Pulitzer Prize you'll never give back. The Columbia Journalism Review may have to create a new award for "Best Support of 21st Century Genocide." The Politi"fact" frauds in Florida will be forced to find a whole new way to offer "context" for this one. And anti-Semites, from those still hiding in caves to Qatar's terrorist financiers to the nation's Ivy League faculty lounge nests of Jew haters, will applaud your efforts.
On Wednesday, the New York Times editors asked a question posed by so many Islamo-supremicists over the millennia: Why haven't they killed all those Jews?
What an excellent question. Indeed, the newspaper posed it as a long-time "dilemma" for the biggest state sponsor of terrorism.
The story was written by Times reporter and UN bureau chief Farnaz Fassihi, an Iranian-American writer who has reported not just for the Times but also for the Wall Street Journal. Fassihi posed the "dilemma" facing the Shiite terror regime in the piece, entitled "After Years of Vowing to Destroy Israel, Iran Faces a Dilemma." It was subtitled, "With Israel bent on crushing Iran’s ally Hamas, Tehran must decide whether it and the proxy militias it arms and trains will live up to its fiery rhetoric."
Sheesh, and we thought the biggest dilemma from recent events was trying to determine the identities of all those people who were burned, raped, beheaded, and shot before their remains were cast to the demon birds on October 7.
But no, Fassihi's piece was concerned that the "supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei," who wore a "black-and-white checkered Palestinian kaffiyeh," hadn't done anything about those Jews. Yet.
Iranian military commanders gloat over training and arming groups across the region that are enemies of Israel, including Hezbollah and Hamas. And when Hamas conducted the Oct. 7 terror attack on Israel that killed 1,400 people, Iranian officials praised it as a momentous achievement, shattering the Jewish state’s sense of security.
Iranians so far have telegraphed that they don't want a full-scale war — but why not? Fassihi wonders.
Now Iran faces a dilemma, weighing how it and its proxy militias — known as the axis of resistance — should respond to Israel’s invasion of Gaza and the killing of thousands of Palestinians, and whether to bolster its revolutionary credentials at the risk of igniting a broader regional war.
“There is no need for Iran to directly get involved in the war and attack Israel itself because it has the resistance axis militia who follow Iran’s policies and strategies and act on its behalf,” said Nasser Imani, an analyst close to the government, in a telephone interview from Tehran.
“I want to reiterate that we are not pursuing the spreading of this war,” Iran’s foreign minister, Hossein Amir Abdollahian, said in a recent interview at Iran’s mission to the United Nations. He was in New York to attend U.N. meetings related to the war.
Abdollahian warned that regional militias in Lebanon, Yemen, Iraq, and Syria could open multiple fronts against Israel, with a high potential “that the result will be that things will not go the way that Israel’s regime wants.” He did not elaborate on what would prompt the groups, which he said act independently.
Fassihi reported that the Iranians are watching their proxies and "many supporters of Iran’s government have even symbolically signed up as volunteers to be deployed to Gaza and fight Israel."
Noah Rothman of National Review wondered what the headline was intended to convey. "What in the name of all that’s holy is this??" he asked on Twitter/X. "What's the dilemma here exactly? Will its terrorist proxies 'live up to' their 'fiery rhetoric' by killing many, many more Jews?"
What in the name of all that’s holy is this?? What’s the dilemma here exactly? Will its terrorist proxies “live up to” their “fiery rhetoric” by killing many, many more Jews? Like they said they would? WTF? pic.twitter.com/m0oen5mPby
— Noah Rothman (@NoahCRothman) November 1, 2023
This is the same unhinged New York Times that reported on vandals tearing down posters of kidnapped Israelis and blamed the posters for triggering the haters.
Yes, you see.. it's the posters of kidnapped innocents that is the match lighting the powder keg, per the New York Times. pic.twitter.com/qtMdzEIUNc
— Joe Concha (@JoeConchaTV) November 1, 2023
It's the same New York Times that looked at a video of Israeli hostages and declared, "It was unclear if Hamas forced the women to make the video."
The New York Times is at its worst when it has to actually cover news pic.twitter.com/8IXGukjs7d
— Jon Levine (@LevineJonathan) October 30, 2023
It's also the same New York Times that reported that Israel struck a Gaza hospital and killed hundreds of civilians — a story that was disproven within minutes.
Related: She's Been Found. In Pieces.
"Now Iran faces a dilemma," Fassihi wrote: "Whether to bolster its revolutionary credentials at the risk of igniting a broader regional war." It's a "dilemma" she would never pose about the United States, Israel, or any Western country.
Good gawd.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member