Trending Topics:

Right wing to Rudoren: Are you now, or have you ever been, a Zionist?

on 32 Comments

Judi Rudoren continues to hold her ground against the right-wing onslaught against her for tweeting Mondoweiss and Ali Abunimah, as well as recommending Peter Beinart’s new book (these are really the charges?). The Washington Free Beacon‘s Adam Kredo interviews her and begins in the most (appropriately) McCarthyite way possible:

The New York Times’ incoming Jerusalem bureau chief, Jodi Rudoren, won’t say if she is a Zionist.

“I’m going to punt on that question,” Rudoren, who is Jewish, told the Washington Free Beacon in an interview yesterday. “I’m not really interested in labels about who I am and what I think.”

He later presses her on the fact that she retweeted a mention from Sami Kishawi of the Love Under Apartheid campaign:

On the issue of her journalistic objectivity, Rudoren said her tweets do not reveal an innate bias against Israel.

“People can say whatever they want. I think my fairness is what I have,” Rudoren said. “You’ve just written something very critical of me and now I’m talking to you. I’m going to talk to all kinds of people.”

Late yesterday, Rudoren promoted a message from a Twitter user whose profile reads: “I dabble in the art of Zionist-busting.” The tweet linked to a website called, Palestine: Love in the Time of Apartheid.

Asked if she considers Israel an apartheid state—as critics of the Jewish state so often do—Rudoren declined comment.

“I don’t have an assessment yet,” she said. “I’m not sure I’ll ever answer that question in the way you’ve just framed it.”

Rudoren replies to the Kredo piece over Twitter:

Adam Horowitz

Adam Horowitz is Executive Editor of

Other posts by .

Posted In:

32 Responses

  1. Dan Crowther on February 16, 2012, 11:44 am

    Right Wing Zio Crazies(RWZC) to Jodi: So, Jodi, “some people say” that you are a raving anti-semitic, drug addicted, communist – your comments?

    Jodi: What the F?

    RWZC: No answer? Hmm. When did you have your last drink?

    Jodi: This is nuts, why are you doing this?

    RWZC: Doing what? Im just asking questions……

  2. Scott on February 16, 2012, 11:52 am

    She actually sounds pretty awesome– deflecting the attacks in a cool, judo like way rather than (as I surely would) countering belligerence with belligerence. You go, lady.

    • BillM on February 16, 2012, 12:54 pm

      It’s worth noting that she does this to both sides. Ali Abunimah’s original tweet had more than a little sharp edge to it, and she politely evaded the issue without a fight.

  3. pabelmont on February 16, 2012, 11:58 am

    Rudoren: “I am a journalist”. Is she a “woman-journalist”? A Zionist-journalist”?

    I know women who are (classical) music composers. Since women are rare in that community, they are often asked to speak on the topic of “Women Composers.” The best (or at least most printable) remark in a refusal to speak farther in answer to this request to speak is: “I am sometimes a woman and sometimes a composer, but I am seldom both at the same time.”

  4. Chu on February 16, 2012, 12:30 pm

    The Times could have used someone that doesn’t have to
    be subjected to this ideological scrutiny; choose a Lutheran
    or a Catholic and be a responsible newspaper.
    For the longest and most complicated conflict of last century,
    they choose anther Jewish representative. How fitting.

    Who cares if she tweets Abunimah, she is biased whether she
    is an anti-Zionist or a Right Wing settler empathizer.
    The New York Times needs be responsible if they want to
    survive the charges of nepotism that will ensue. This is like
    the government selecting Bernake over Greenspan. It’s a
    family thing, la cosa nostra…

    • annie on February 16, 2012, 12:44 pm

      This is like the government selecting Bernake over Greenspan.

      huh? i’m not so sure i agree with that. Bernake and Greenspan have a fair amount in common aside from both being jewish and economists.

      i don’t think we can judge her simply by saying she’s a journalist and she’s jewish. is that what you’re saying? can we wait til a report comes in please? at least one?

      Who cares if she tweets Abunimah, she is biased whether she
      is an anti-Zionist or a Right Wing settler empathizer.

      everyone has bias.

      that doesn’t have to be subjected to this ideological scrutiny; choose a Lutheran or a Catholic

      what makes you think a Lutheran or a Catholic wouldn’t be subjected to ideological scrutiny?

      • Chu on February 16, 2012, 12:56 pm

        A Lutheran or Catholic may be subjected to scrutiny, but they don’t have a bias in the conflict, that is their religion. Look at the bang-up job Ethan Bronner performed – definitely no conflict there.
        Do you think that perhaps NY Times could make a better pick?
        Let’s say an Taiwanese American journalist.

      • Scott on February 16, 2012, 1:07 pm

        Though perhaps there is undiscovered talent in that realm, there. (I went to the Wizards-Knicks game, Game Three of the NEW ERA. Two (white) guys had a big banner saying “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Point Guard”.

      • annie on February 16, 2012, 1:26 pm

        most people have a bias in the conflict chu. unless they know nothing about it.

      • Chu on February 16, 2012, 1:44 pm

        Annie, Most citizens have a bias against the state of Israel if supposed American values mean anything. The US news feeds the majority of Americans the wrong idea about Israeli’s requiring more freedom (And I suppose that’s accomplished through more land acquisitions via settlers), when it should be the highlighting the importance of Palestinians keeping their property and ability to live in their centuries old towns and villages.
        Ask any American if they would give up their house because some settler family knocked at your door and said ‘this is my great grandaddy’s home and we’ve come to return’. I’d think you’ll see a gun fight for sure.

        You need a third party to monitor the system, not another tribal insider. It’s a corrupted practice that you seem to endorse. One analogy, asbestos contaminated buildings have someone remove the contaminated materials, but the law requires that a third party inspect to insure there is no collusion with the person removing the material. In the end, the building occupant is assured that the work was done accordingly.

      • annie on February 16, 2012, 3:41 pm

        You need a third party to monitor the system, not another tribal insider. It’s a corrupted practice that you seem to endorse.

        i seem to endorse? we are discussing two things here, a ‘practice’ as you call it, and one person, a person you claim is biased because she is jewish.

        i do not know her so unlike you i am not prepared to assume she is more or less biased than another person simply because of her ethnicity. all i know of her is a few tweets.

        i am not endorsing a ‘practice’. i do think we should have media that isn’t completely weighted down with one ethnicity which, as a matter of fact i addressed in embedded links this morning.

        i am choosing to not judge one person, i am also making the call that this conflict, being one of the most controversial conflicts on the world stage, is a conflict most intelligent informed people already have a bias towards one way or the other.

        also, this is not a situation where someone asks me prior to anyone being chosen for the position what my opinion might be. it is an after the fact opinion, she’s already hired. under these circumstances i am choosing not to come out of the gate with my holsters on and my guns drawn accusing her of bias when there is no evidence of it. in fact, within about 30 seconds of hearing the news of her new position, before any of these tweets were even on her website, i shot her off a tweet “@rudoren go Jodi, show us your unbiased-ness!”

        that is because i want her to know there are people out there with expectations of her and i have faith the truth will speak for itself. whether her work reflects that truth remains to be seen.

        she is already hired and my approach is to assume the best and go from here as opposed to judging her solely on her ethnicity which i find distasteful. also, i am on staff here and i wouldn’t want a negative prejudgement of mine based solely on ethnicity to reflect poorly on either me or the site.

        as for your insult, we just think differently. you use the term tribal insider as if to imply no jew can be trusted wrt reporting this issue. i’m not like that, sorry to disappoint you.

      • Chu on February 16, 2012, 10:15 pm

        What I am saying is let’s not kid ourselves about the newspaper’s bias
        toward Israel. In a balanced media organization, and let’s say liberal newspaper, they would say let’s try a Palestinian American journalist and get the other side for once after Ethan Bronner’s questionable ties to Israeli government officials. You know as well as I that that wouldn’t happen in the NY Times at this point in history.
        It’s about the reputation of the newspaper and they can choose whomever they want because it’s a business.

        I don’t doubt Rudoren’s ability to be a potentially balanced journalist, but I wonder why they have to come from a religious background that is involved in this conflict. I’m not asking for your answer, but it’s something that the Times should reflect upon.

      • annie on February 17, 2012, 1:39 am

        let’s say liberal newspaper, they would say let’s try a Palestinian American journalist and get the other side for once

        i would faint and fall over if the nyt hired a palestinian reporter as jerusalem bureau chief, this is not the world we are living in. it just so happens the newspaper of record in the US has certain attachments to israel, this will not be going away anytime soon. live with it. that said, there are american jews who are clear headed. this is the world we are living in. they hired her. think positive. i don’t know what else to say.

      • Chu on February 18, 2012, 6:57 pm

        ” live with it.” – you can live with it. God, what snark…

      • marc b. on February 16, 2012, 1:04 pm

        annie, i’ll reserve judgment as to her biases. it’s her lack of experience that most bothers me, at least initially. what have i missed? what are her fundamental qualifications for this assignment? when i see someone apparently unqualified for such a critical position, i automatically, cynically, assume that *ahem* the meritocracy isn’t functioning.

      • annie on February 16, 2012, 1:26 pm

        what are her fundamental qualifications for this assignment?

        she might be a great reporter. she’s been around for awhile. her bosses might trust her ethics. they probably don’t want egg on their faces over the kind of embarrassing situations bronner got them into. they probably wants someone who crap doesn’t stick to who is smart, adaptable, creative, lots of stuff.

        have you checked out bronner’s past “He was the paper’s education editor from 1999 to 2001 and its national education correspondent from 1997 to 1999.”

        isn’t that what she was too?

        how did he make the leap?

        Bronner served as assistant editorial page editor of the Times, and before that worked in the paper’s investigative unit, focusing on the September 11 attacks. A series of articles on al Qaeda that Bronner helped edit during that time was awarded the 2001 Pulitzer Prize for explanatory journalism.


      • marc b. on February 16, 2012, 2:59 pm

        have you checked out bronner’s past “He was the paper’s education editor from 1999 to 2001 and its national education correspondent from 1997 to 1999.”

        but, annie, you can’t use bronner as a postive example of anything. so he was unqualified too. for the time being i will keep an open mind and assume that given the vitriol, ruderon must have the potential for being an improvement over ethan ‘if the GOI said it, it must be true’ bronner. good riddance to that schmuck.

      • annie on February 17, 2012, 1:31 am

        wasn’t using it as a ‘positive’, just using it as a ‘norm’ as if to say, she’s definitely at least as qualified as whatever their standards were in the past.

      • Scott on February 16, 2012, 1:04 pm

        Have to agree with Annie here. A high percentage of Time’s reporters are Jewish–probably more who have a strong interest in covering I/P. If one finds that unfortunate, one can always start publishing one’s own newspaper. And probably (if one assumes that perhaps the Times wants to step away from Likud stenography) a Jew will be better able to withstand the inevitable brickbats from Camera and the rest of them.

      • Chu on February 16, 2012, 2:25 pm

        I’m not sure I agree Scott. Keeping the status quo, has not yielded many changes. NY Times always gets beat up by the Zionists, so they should choose someone impartial to the conflict. That would seem to solve both perception problems -the public’s doubt about the Times affinity to Zionism & Israel, and the Zionists doubts that they are choosing someone who is bent toward left wing Zionist politics.

  5. marc b. on February 16, 2012, 12:39 pm

    On the issue of her journalistic objectivity, Rudoren said her tweets do not reveal an innate bias against Israel.

    what a slimey pr*ck. does that moron kcredo even know what ‘innate’ means? or is he suggesting that anti-isreali sentiment is an essential, immutable characteristic of ruderon’s personality? (it seems more plausible that zionists have an innate obsession with race and innateness, if that’s a word.) and make no mistake, there is a not-so subtle inference of ‘self-hatred’ in this comment, anti-israeli criticism being one example of the ‘new anti-semitism’. (i hate to admit it, but the goldenbergs and kcredos of the world have me rooting for ruderon. not that she won’t have every opportunity to disappoint in the future.)

  6. Oklahoma farmer on February 16, 2012, 12:58 pm

    If things get too hot and you need a hideout.. come down to Oklahoma till things cool off. We’ve got a 24 hour WalMart and it’s only 90 miles to Dallas… I mean, what more could you want?

    • Kathleen on February 16, 2012, 5:19 pm

      I really like Oklahoma I have a mother in law in Lonewolf Oklahoma..near Hobart. One drive through the state to her house I counted 47 read tailed hawks. Gorgeous state in certain areas. When I am in Lonewolf I go down to the Co-op Cotton Gin and talk to many of the farmers about how they are a bunch of commie pinkos. The world Co-op is every where. And most of these guys are Republicans. Have fun ribbing them. I’m sure they have some words for me after I leave the gin

  7. Justice Please on February 16, 2012, 4:52 pm

    Cool! She’s not pandering to them, but seriously standing her ground. I’m impressed. I hope she keeps it up, and of course by her deeds we shall judge them. Talk is relatively cheap, even if Zionists want to imprison you merely for talking if they had their way.

    Speaking of which, notice how Zionists and supporters of Israeli status quo mostly focus on the messenger, like “oh look the person she retweeted has this and that on her profile”. While critics of Israel mostly focus on the message, like “Isabel Kershner said X, which is disturbing”.

  8. radii on February 16, 2012, 4:59 pm

    Jodi is not even finished with her first piece on I/P as the new bureau chief for NYT and the zio-crazies are already beating her with the loyalty sticks “stop resisting!”

  9. DICKERSON3870 on February 16, 2012, 7:45 pm

    RE: “Judi Rudoren continues to hold her ground against the right-wing onslaught against her” ~ A. Horowitz

    FROM Dahlia Scheindlin, +972 Magazine, 2/14/12:
    (excerpts)…After two weeks in America visiting family and friends, two observations struck me powerfully. First, the understanding that Israel is committing terrible deeds that are destroying itself and its neighbors, has penetrated among you…
    …On this trip, I was stunned to learn that now you don’t even really want to visit Israel because you can’t face what you’re increasingly coming to see as a brutal occupying entity flirting with fascist notions. . .
    …My second observation is that because of your fear – not of the goyim or the anti-Semites, but of yourselves! – you are keeping a low public profile. On this trip, I suddenly realized how naïve it was to imagine that J Street had sufficiently opened the door for anyone who cares critically for Israel to speak out. I underestimated how deep and terrible the intimidation has become and that one political lobby group is far from enough.
    I do understand: those of you who still call the Jewish community home, are afraid of the onslaught that you will receive from your (our) very own people. I hold no illusions about how vicious the attacks might be. We Jews, not the goyim, will call you the most painful names, will threaten in various ways to label you as beyond the pale of your people, should you voice your critique. You might be chastised in your professional community. You will be hit not only by shadowy bloggers but by the very cherished and established groups you have loyally, even automatically, supported over the years. The anger might come from your friends and it might even come from your family. . .
    …Here’s how that made me feel: abandoned, by the liberal Jews of America. You were swept away by Ruth Wisse’s thesis that liberals betrayed the Jewish cause by believing too much in rational universalism and failing to acknowledge the unique, everlasting threat of anti-Semitism…

  10. Pixel on February 16, 2012, 8:41 pm

    Thanks, Dickerson.

    Great link!

  11. eGuard on February 17, 2012, 7:27 am

    Of course she is a Zionist. She will live in a stolen house.

  12. Oscar on February 17, 2012, 9:26 am

    The hysterical neo-con attack on Jodi Rudoren before she’s written a single piece for the NYT speaks volumes about her predecessor. Obviously, the reporting of Eitan Bronner was perfectly acceptable to the Goldberg crowd — and it’s an indictment of the Times’ Bill Keller who actively violated the paper’s own ethics and standards repeatedly by defending Bronner’s shockingly biased reporting.

    With both Keller and Bronner shifted elsewhere at the NYT, here’s hoping the changing of the guard will result in the type of objectivity we all believe Jodi will bring to the most challenging assignment in journalism. . .

    Congrats, Jodi, stay true to your convictions.

  13. Mndwss on February 17, 2012, 12:50 pm

    “In recognizing a zionist, physical appearance counts for nothing. If he openly declares himself to be a zionist we take his word for it. If a person consistently reads and advocates the views expressed in a zionist publication, he may be a zionist. If a person supports organizations which reflect zionist teachings or organizations labeled zionist by the department of justice she may be a zionist. If a person defends the activities of zionist nations while consistently attacking the domestic and foreign policies of the United States, she may be a zionist. If a person does all these things, over a period of time, he MUST be a zionist!

    But there are other zionizts who dont show their real faces.”

    Or was that communist or terrorist? It was something with ist in it…

    How to Spot a ……ist:

  14. Justice Please on February 19, 2012, 5:03 pm
  15. Citizen on February 22, 2012, 1:48 am

    Alison Weir has a great piece in Counterpunch on how the Rudoren appointment keeps the NYT news about Israel-Palestine “all in the family.” For over 40 years the slot has been held by Jews only.

    No conflict of interest there, eh?

Leave a Reply