Not for the first time, the New York Times, like the Axis media it rules over as the “news source of record,” has reminded me of the “dishonest waiter.
In “Denial,” the film about the lawsuit by British Holocaust denier and fake historian David Irving against American Deborah Lipstadt, the late, great Tom Wilkinson as Lipstadt’s barrister Richard Rampton, in the process of excoriating Irving to the court where the case is being tried, evokes the analogy of “the dishonest waiter” in a memorable speech:
“My lord, during this trial, we have heard from Professor Evans and others of at least 25 major falsifications of history. Well, says Mr. Irving, ‘all historians make mistakes.’ But there is a difference between negligence, which is random in its effect, and a deliberateness, which is far more one-sided. All Mr. Irving’s little fictions, all his tweaks of the evidence all tend in the same direction: the exculpation of Adolf Hitler. He is, to use an analogy, like the waiter who always gives the wrong change. If he is honest, we may expect sometimes his mistakes to favor the customers, sometimes himself. But Mr. Irving is the dishonest waiter. All his mistakes work in his favor. How far, if at all, Mr. Irving’s Antisemitism is the cause of his Hitler apology, or vice versa, is unimportant. Whether they are taken together or individually, it is clear that they have led him to prostitute his reputation as a serious historian in favor of a bogus rehabilitation of Adolf Hitler and the dissemination of virulent Antisemitic propaganda.”
Bingo. New York Times, meet David Irving! Of course in this case the victim of bias and bad faith is not the history of the Holocaust, but the life and reputation of Charlie Kirk, the conservative activist and organizer who was assassinated by a radicalized leftist who had been told by the Axis that Kirk was. Just as Stephen King pronounced Kirk a monster who believed in killing gays, the Times pronounced him an anti-Semite by attributing ananti-Semitic statement he was criticizing to him. But you see, King is just an old knee-jerk progressive celebrity (like Whoopie Goldberg, Robert DeNiro or Bruce Springstein) whom nobody should pay attention to when he opines outside of his area of expertise. The New York Times’ job is to inform the public, correctly. Yeah, I know, I know, anyone can make a mistake (Rationalizations 19 and 20) but oddly, the Times never makes such mistakes that unjustly impugn and denigrate Democrats and fellow progressives.
Then the Times added to its ethics-transgression dossier regarding Kirk by publishing this garbage op-ed: “I Was Supposed to Debate Charlie Kirk. Here’s What I Would Have Said.” The editor who green-lighted this thing should be stuffed into a barrel with fat Lithuanian midgets, to quote Woody Allen in “What’s Up, Tiger Lilly?” A socialist demagogue I blissfully had never heard of before, Hasan Piker, gave us one side of a debate that never occurred, omitting Kirk’s, or anyone’s with half a cerebrum really, rebuttals of his consistently dubious assertions, some of which included,
- “[Kirk fell] victim to what clearly seems to be a rising tide of political violence.” Deceit: It is a rising tide of political violence against conservatives and Republicans coming from the Left’s campaign of demonization. Left that detail out, I guess. Kirk would have corrected him.
- “The United States has both very loose gun laws and more violent gun deaths per capita than any other developed nation in the world. And while shootings occur most anywhere, campuses can be especially deadly. As news broke that Mr. Kirk was shot at Utah Valley University, there was a near-simultaneous tragedy at a high school in small-town Colorado, where a 16-year-old shot two fellow students. There have been 47 school shootings this year.”
Ah yes, another anti-gun hack exploiting a murder that could not possibly have been prevented by more gun laws (except ones banning and confiscating all guns)! And calling the execution of Kirk while speaking at a college a “school shooting” is statistical manipulation designed to deceive—which is why the “school shooting” figures are wildly inflated. There is no connection or relevance between the assassination and the Colorado episode or any mass shooting.
- The author tries to blame Kirk’s death on the usual anti-American, anti-capitalism boogiemen: “rising rents and homelessness, the destruction caused by climate change, titanic levels of inequality, and too many others to name here. Our capitalist way of life — always accumulating, never evening out — leaves more and more people to deal with these problems on their own.”
What “destruction caused by climate change?” “Evening out” is a cute euphemism for “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs .”
- “Americans inhabit a culture of violence to which we have become habitually desensitized. There’s a connection between our culture of violence and American foreign policy… A foreign policy organized around punishing and killing our supposedly sworn enemies, diplomacy be damned, conveys the terrible message that we can only kill and maim our way to achieving the world we want to live in….I fear that this is most evident in America’s ironclad support for Israel. The genocide in Gaza has claimed tens of thousands of innocent lives. Meanwhile, Israel has carried out brazen assassinations and attempted assassinations in Iran, Qatar, Lebanon and Yemen. Backed up by Mr. Trump and, previously, by Mr. Biden, our government’s virtually unyielding support for Israel tells a scary story about the country we live in.”
Referring to Israel’s absolutely necessary and just war against Hamas as “genocide) is a tell, and Piker’s weeping for Iran, which has vowed to wipe Israel off the map, is signature significance.
It’s astonishingly easy to win a debate when your opponent is dead and can’t knock down your rickety straw men and contrived falsehoods. Naturally, the Times thought this was a fair contest. In an actual debate, Kirk would have made a fool out of this guy.
Ethics Alarms 
Jack wrote: In an actual debate, Kirk would have made a fool out of this guy.
The guy made a fool out of himself. As usual, the best way to let a liberal defeat his own position is to let him talk. This was no exception. It was, unsurprisingly, a litany of the same liberal tropes we have been hearing for the last 30 years or so. Jesse Jackson could’ve written this in 1985.
But you’re right about the Times, and your choice of simile was beautifully apt and cuttingly appropriate. To any rational mind reading it, it’s going to leave a mark.
I confess, I have “boycotted” the Times and WaPo because of all the American institutions the left has captured, gutted, and continues to wear as a skinsuit while demanding respect (thanks IowaHawk), they are two of the most important, along with the academy and public schools.
But these two stupidities by the Times show it is starting to reach parody territory. Perhaps they should rename the paper to “The Babylon Times.” Then again, no — the Babylon Bee is more ethical, and correct more often.
This practice is part of the arsenal of the so-called resistance. They know people are generally inattentive and low information. They know people tend to read only headlines. They know the first version of events is often believed with new information being taken skeptically.
So, the news media, in the thrall of its idols in the Democratic Party, perhaps doesn’t do as much work to verify quotes by people it doesn’t like. Confirmation bias kicks in. After all, if an out-of-context quote can be published as part of its propagandizing efforts, it will do the expected and desired damage. If later forced to retract or correct, it can count on its followers either missing the update, refusing to believe the update or rationalizing an ulterior motive for the update.
Case in point: President Trump sued CBS for editing the Kamala Harris interview. The talking points were released that Trump was using his power to coerce the news media into not reporting negatively about him. For that reason, the Left’s followers believe that Stephen Colbert’s show was cancelled because Trump forced CBS to do so and that CBS is cowardly in the face of oppression.
With that narrative in mind, consider that the NYT correcting its earlier version of the Kirk quote will likely not change anyone’s mind. They believe Kirk was antisemitic. They believe the NYT was correct in its first version. They will believe any correction is the NYT caving to the enemy of Freedom of the Press Donald Trump. NYT may get backlash for what is believed to be submitting to Trump. Or the Left may just rationalize the whole thing by saying, “Maybe that specific quote was not true, but we know Kirk was a racist, antisemitic, homophobic, woman-hating zealot. Free Palestine!”
These news outlets have created a nightmare for themselves. Even if they wanted to start reporting the facts, they can’t because they’ve corrupted their fellow travelers into expecting news a certain way.
By the way, did any of you see all the violent demonstrations that were led by conservatives this weekend after the Kirk assassination? Did you see all the Teslas our side torched?…all the buildings, homes, and businesses that were looted and burned by enraged Republicans out for blood? Did you see the lists of liberal “targets” published on Twitter by the myriad followers and fans of Charlie Kirk? Did you listen to Erika Kirk’s call for vengeance on those that not only wished for the death of her husband before he was killed, but celebrated the event when it happened?
Yeah, me neither…
I was remarking to a friend yesterday that the proof that conservatives are not like the Leftists is that while Charlie Kirk has been assassinated, people like Ilhan Omar and Rashida Talib continue to draw breath.
This is the second attempt at this because wordpress said my account was locked and I needed to reset my password, then ate my comment after I did so.
Hasan Piker’s Ethics Alarms dossier, were such a thing to exist, would fill a cabinet all its own. He’s the second most popular streamer on Twitch, and has been praised several times by Twitch’s current head, Dan Clancy. He has stated that the United States deserved 9/11. He has called for the assassination of several politicians, for which he received a one day ban from Twitch (which occurred on his usual day off). He had a Houthi terrorist on his show, and compared him favorably to a beloved animated pirate. He has repeatedly called for the dissolution of Israel, and repeatedly claimed that Israel is committing genocide on the Palestinians. He is a socialist who lives in a multi-million dollar mansion. He reaches millions of people and has been compared favorably to Joe Rogan, including by NPR and the NYT. It’s not hyperbole to say that Hasan Piker is scum of the Earth and anyone who views him in a positive light does not deserve to participate in polite society.
I was blissfully unaware of Piker until his op-ed, but have read some of his past opinions recently. He wrote that the US “deserved” 9/11, for example. And the Times gave him a platform! That’s signature significance as far as I’m concerned: the New York Post never published an op-ed by Nick Fuentes.jdkazoo (nice guy, smart guy), who returned last week briefly to try to defend the Axis trying to excuse Kirk’s assassination, is on record with blog-bomber “A Friend” that the Times isn’t biased. For the second time, he’s fled because his position became indefensible. And it is.