The racist Israeli politician Itamar Ben Gvir could be the lynchpin for Netanyahu’s comeback. But the “New York Times” is keeping that news from its readers. Even as Israel supporters in the Congress, Robert Menendez and Brad Sherman, express concern about what Ben Gvir would do for Israel’s image in the west.

Once again, the U.S. mainstream media is missing — or covering up — a central reason that Israel carried out a preemptive attack on Gaza, killing 46 people, including 16 children. Yair Lapid used the attack to go ahead of Benjamin Netanyahu in polling in the election campaign.

A long-delayed New York Times editorial on the killing of Shireen Abu Akleh bears the insulting headline, “Who Killed Journalist Shireen Abu Akleh?” As if the Israeli government position bears considering, “Palestinian gunmen” had killed her. When in fact, reporting over the past month (although not in the Times) makes clear that the only genuine questions are: Did the Israeli soldier who killed Shireen Abu Akleh target her on purpose? If so, who ordered it? And who in the Israeli chain of command is continuing the coverup?

“The army and the settlement enterprise are one and the same” — a general in Israel’s occupying army says the quiet part about Zionism out loud. It has always been a messianic religious movement to establish Jewish supremacy in as much land as it can conquer. Gen. Roy Zweig was later reprimanded for speaking out, on Jerusalem Day.

‘Haaretz’ runs two articles attacking Israeli Zionism as a hateful dead-end, urging the world to take action. The authors’ scathing words would never make it into an American newspaper. Contemporary Zionism is a “Jewish mutation,” Amira Hass writes in despair. While B. Michael writes that Zionism has created a “small, arrogant, violent, wicked nation” of “Jew-oids” who have taken the “wicked parts of Judaism and turned it into the essence.”

As global powers make progress toward a renewed Iran deal, the Israeli Prime Minister is objecting to it, the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, an Israel lobby organization, is calling a new agreement “a surrender pact,” and the New York Times, characteristically, has published a biased article that raises objections to the proposed deal without giving its supporters much space to defend it.

Former Israeli High Court of Justice Justice Menachem Mazuz says he left the Court last year because he could no longer lend legitimacy to Palestinian house demolitions, which he said reflect the barbaric principle of an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.

Haaretz publisher Amos Schocken: “The product of Zionism, the State of Israel, is not a Jewish and democratic state, but has instead become an apartheid state, plain and simple.”

The Israeli government “fully supports and assists” the recent spike in settler violence against Palestinians. Because “Continuous, systemic violence meted out by settlers is part of Israel’s official policy, driving massive takeover of Palestinian” lands, B’Tselem says in a groundbreaking report. But the Washington Post’s recent article on settler violence suggests that the Israeli government is taking it on vigorously.

Leading Israeli human rights attorney Michael Sfard responds to South Africa’s Chief Rabbi Zeev Warren Goldstein, who recently argued that the term “apartheid” should only apply to South Africa.