New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof claimed that Israel uses dogs.to rape Palestinian prisoners. Getty Images for Concordia Summit The Issue: Nicholas Kristof’s New York Times column claiming that the IDF trains dogs to rape prisoners. It’s shocking — though not surprising — that The New York Times would publish such an unconfirmed and inflammatory article (“ ‘Mounting’ shame of Nicholas Kristof,” Douglas Murray, May 15).
A newspaper once guided by the motto “All the News That’s Fit to Print” now appears to be serving partisan political agendas.
The widely documented torture and sexual abuse suffered by the hostages held by Hamas never seemed to receive the same level of outrage from the Times. Irresponsible reporting of this kind does real damage.
After hearing about Kristof’s article in the Times about Israeli rape dogs, I thank God the New York Post is more careful when vetting its sources.
Arab sources have made many other accusations regarding Israel’s use of animals. They say Israelis unleashed rats and pigs to drive Palestinians out of their homes, put deadly jellyfish into the Red Sea to stop tourists from visiting Egypt, use cows, pigeons and squirrels to spy on them and release boars trained to only uproot Palestinian crops.
Instead of doing an investigation and reaching a conclusion, the Times often begins with a conclusion, then fabricates facts to support it. This has been done repeatedly.
Also, interviewing Gazans is a joke: They know what will happen to them if they tell the truth about their Hamas masters and don’t repeat their lies.
The New York Times won a Pulitzer in 1932 for Walter Duranty’s fake coverage of the Soviet Union. It won again for reporting on the fictitious Steele dossier. Now it wins again with duplicitous photography by a Gaza-based photographer (“Hardly a moral Gray Lady,” Andrea Peyser, May 13).
At least the Times produces the world’s finest crossword puzzles. Consistency is always important.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has a warped sense of history (“AOC muffs US history,” May 10).
We revolted from Britain in 1776 because of taxation without representation. To suggest the colonists revolted against billionaires is absurd.
This only goes to show that American history is so neglected by teachers and students that crack-brained theories of this type are accepted. The Founding Fathers would have laughed themselves silly if they heard AOC.
Why is it that our politicians who seem to speak the loudest seem to know the least?
Founding Father John Hancock was considered one of the wealthiest men in Massachusetts. He heavily subsidized the American Revolution and in particular, George Washington’s Continental Army.
AOC could have used schooling in something other than social media before becoming an educationally impoverished member of Congress.
Want to weigh in on today’s stories? Send your thoughts (along with your full name and city of residence) to letters@nypost.com. Letters are subject to editing for clarity, length, accuracy, and style.
