Wow. I used to think Nick Kristof was the best and most trustworthy in Times’ generally unethical stable of pundits. Now I learn that he is nuts, or so biased against Israel that his brain sneaked out of his skull while he was sleeping.
This insane “report,” which his paper dutifully published because it no longer operates as a professional news source when politics are involved, is based entirely on second hand sources that have been anti-Israel and pro-Hamas from the beginning of the 2023 war Hamas began with a surprise terror attack on Israel’s civilians. Kristof cites only the claims of Palestinians, and sources that base their reports on the same. His main source is Sami al-Sai, a “free-lance journalist who has been painting Hamas and Gaza as victims of “genocide” since the war began. That is not an independent source. Neither is the Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor, also an anti-Israel group, or the United Nations, which has supported Palestinian propganda since the war began. At one point, Kristof even writes, “There is no evidence that Israeli leaders order rapes.” There is also no evidence that the alleged rapes occurred.
There is definitive evidence that the Hamas terrorists raped Israeli women, however. Kristof’s fantasy appears to be a deliberate rationalization (#2. Whataboutism, or “They’re Just as Bad“) to excuse Hamas/Gaza/ Palestinians for starting the bloody conflict. Coincidentally (?) an extensive, genuinely sourced report was released today documenting Hamas’s attack, including the rapes, and sexual assaults against the kidnapped hostages. One commenter on “X’ wrote, “If you do not believe @nytimes knew EXACTLY what they were doing with the timing of the Kristof “opinion” piece [ie, trying to preempt justified outrage at Hamas’s sexual crimes by suggesting that Israel similarly engages in such crimes] I have a nice bridge to sell you.”
The Kristof piece seems like smoking gun evidence that the Times is filled with anti-Semites, or, in the alternative, people too stupid to put on their shoes after their socks. At very least, I would expect the Times to find a dog training expert to explain how the hell you would train a dog to rape a human being. Spuds (above) laughed when I told him about the article.
As Jack Nicholson says in “A Few Good Men,” this isn’t funny, it’s tragic. The American Left is embracing anti-Semitism to an extent that hasn’t been seen since the Thirties. David Bernstein wrote today, after an attack on a Jewish neighborhood in New York City, which elected a pro-Hamas mayor, “We are getting closer to an actual pogrom like Crown Heights 1991. Seriously time for Brooklyn Jews to arm themselves.”
Ethics Alarms 
Amy Curtis from Townhall wrote an article with the title “Is This NYT Story Why Antisemitic Mobs Terrorized Jewish Neighborhoods Last Night?” Another Townhall article mentions that Kristoff’s article inspired them to participate in last nights protests.
The NYT is giving room to anti-Semitism, and has the same effect on the easily agitated as Der Völkischer Beobachter and Der Stürmer back in the 1930s, and we know how that ended.
It is time for the Jews in NYC to arm themselves, and be prepared to use them the next time such an event happens, like the rooftop Koreans during the Rodney King riots in LA.
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/amy-curtis/2026/05/12/ny-antisemitic-protests-n2675930
I remember a story about a concentration camp victim who claimed a guard at one of the camps had trained a dog to “hump” on command and would subject female inmates to this treatment.
I don’t know if training a dog in that way is possible or not, but this type of story isn’t new and could simply be borrowed from previous atrocity accounts. We’ve already seen that they anti-Israel narrative is that they are akin to Nazis.
Also that Jews eat children. The Times story reminded me of that.
I would love to see the NYT comments on this story.