Thank you. I had read about this project some time ago on this site, but I didn't know that the program is now available, albeit unofficially. It is good that it is available: even if not news to some, it will be to many, if they see it Perhaps bits and pieces of the truth will be disseminated, though not, I suspect, by the New York Times.
Since Trump was elected, NYT has been praising itself profusely: it's good for revenue I'm sure. Thus, for example, a full page ad in Sunday's edition, avowing that:
"THE TRUTH NEVER WAVERS.
"THE TRUTH REQUIRES COMMITMENT. [commitment in the form of a subscription, I assume]
"THE TRUTH IS WORTH IT" [i.e., the price of that subscription, no doubt]
Down at the bottom of the page, in smaller type, we read, in part:
"Telling the full story on every topic we report takes diligence, courage and an unwavering commitment to the truth across the entire organization . . . [etc. etc. etc. blah blah blah]
An excellent commentary, a needed corrective to the slanted version of reality reported by much of the MSM.
PS: regarding the blunder of the second Iraq war, as I recall, the war drums were beaten mainly by the elite press where the neocons ruled: NYT, WaPo, WSJ, etc. During the run-up to the war, Editor and Publisher repeatedly surveyed opinion among editorial boards of a much broader sample of U.S. press throughout the country, and found much less support for invading. The coastal elites got their way. Perhaps Trump is their belated punishment. Unfortunately, we all must suffer as a result, much like the teacher who punishes her entire class for the sins of the true malefactor.
Thank you for this eloquent statement. There are understandable reasons for the tragedy that has befallen Palestine, but tragedy it is. And not just for Palestinians, but, as you note, for Jews as well. And for Americans who are complicit. Surely a better way, a more humane solution, is possible.
Among the collateral damage, as you observe, is the way that concern about "anti-semitism" has been abused. Throughout most of my lifetime it has been a serious charge. Now, it's often just more "fake news." Consider the cynical way that Facebook's leaders defended Facebook by simultaneously smearing Soros and calling its critics antisemitic.
"While Mr. Zuckerberg has conducted a public apology tour in the last year, Ms. Sandberg has overseen an aggressive lobbying campaign to combat Facebook’s critics, shift public anger toward rival companies and ward off damaging regulation. Facebook employed a Republican opposition-research firm to discredit activist protesters, in part by linking them to the liberal financier George Soros. It also tapped its business relationships, lobbying a Jewish civil rights group to cast some criticism of the company as anti-Semitic."
re "Bari Weiss, the conservative NYT opinion page editor"
I have a sincere question, which, like all sincere questions, reveals ignorance. I begin with that preface, because I might appear to be making a snarky comment of some sort. Does NYT have two opinion page editors, with Weiss being the designated "conservative," or is she THE opinion page editor, who is being described as a conservative? I can imagine that either might be true. I've always thought of NYT as at the "liberal" end of the spectrum on most issues, as that term is used in the U.S., or at least left of center. Of course, Israel is very much a special case.
Either way, the fact that she has such a position says a lot about the NYT.