NY Times and the Modern Protocols of the Elders of Zion

Courtest [sic] of the Agami family
Army Specialist Daniel J. Agami, 25, of Coconut Creek, Fla. More Photos >

Check out the front page of the New York Times for tomorrow's paper, "commemorating" the 4,000th dead in the liberation of Iraq. Whats with the Star of David? Grim milestone? Drag out the Jewish canard. What's the implication? More pro Israel than pro America -- he died for America, for you, you yellow bellied slugs.

NYTIMES PROPAGANDA: IRAQ WAR WAS FOR ISRAEL Reliapundit, Astute blogger
SUBTLE? SUBLIMINAL? No, actually clumsy and too obvious

The sleuthpundit over at Reliapundit

It's the left-wing line: Bush went to war against Iraq for Israel. Even Obama adviser McPeak recently said as much.

Of course, other left-wingers say we went to war against Saddam for the House of Saud.

Don't ask for consistency or congruence: the left is insane. And they control the NYTIMES and most of the MSM.

That's why we see so much anti-USA, anti-Semitic, pro-AL Qaeda propaganda in the media. And make no mistake abut it: that's what this photo is ALL about - giving credence to the lies of the left and al Qaeda..

The New York Times will never get it. Never. They lack depth, honor, integrity, ....... love of country. They are vapid leftists. They will never get it. No honor. The hatred the good for being good.

UPDATE: In an article that Ed Lasky sent a link to, the rabbi who gave Agami's eulogy said:

"He kept kosher while in the Army, he slept with an American and Israeli flag over his bunk, his rifle had a sign titled "The Hebrew Hammer," and he named the U.S. Army issued yalmulke his "Combatika," Denberg said. "Daniel's sense of humor and love of life was evident in all that he did."

Agami had an Israeli AND AN AMERICAN FLAG over is bunk.  Interesting that the Times article just mentions and shows the Israeli one.  If the rabbi is accurate, this is an odd omission. 

UPDATE: Excellent post from the Bookworm room:

Private Agami [photo above] had time for everyone, and everyone had time for him. Affectionately called GI Jew, he held his religion up to the light. He used it to build tolerance among the troops and shatter stereotypes; few in his unit had ever met a Jew. He flew the Israeli flag over his cot in Adhamiya. He painted the words Hebrew Hammer onto his rifle. He even managed to keep kosher, a feat that required a steady diet of protein shakes and cereal.

He is a mensch, something that is also reflected in the letters and emails his family made available to the Times for this profile.

And yet, when it came to Army Specialist Agami, the Times made a rather unusual decision — it used his picture as the major photograph to illustrate the article.  Choosing his picture would be so unusual, of course, if it weren’t for the fact that the picture they chose has Agami sitting in front of a huge Israeli flag.  Reading down into the article (way down, almost near the end), it makes sense why he would be photographed in front of this flag:  “He flew the Israeli flag over his cot in Adhamiya.”  Given that Agami willingly fought for and died for this country, I don’t see anyone having a problem with his choice of decor.

What is a problem is the fact that the Times uses this particular photograph to illustrate an article about American troops who have died in Iraq.  One simply can’t escape the impression that the Times is trying to send the subliminal message — a very strong subliminal message — that Americans are fighting and dying for Israel, not for America.

It would be nice to believe that the Times highlighted this particular photograph because its editors wanted to make the point that ours is an exceptionally pluralist army, made up of Americans representing the vast tapestry of race and religion that enriches America.  Given the Times‘ political biases, though, it’s very difficult to escape the conclusion that some editor couldn’t resist making a political point even as he followed a directive from on high to honor America’s war dead.

From Richard Baehr

Apparently he was known as G.I. Jew-and was very proud of his heritage.
http://daniel-agami.memory-of.com/legacy.aspx. He mentored orphaned children in Iraq-sounds like a very admirable young man. Too bad, the Times did not  see fit to give us more of a sense of the man.

I found a few lines on Daniel Agami , the guy in the picture, on the  third  page of this very long article (missed it first time through).  he was  Jewish and  flew the flag over his bed.    if you see front  page, you get  the message I suggest.  If you complete the article   you still wonder why  this guy and that picture was selected.  is it  because he was more pro-Israel  than pro-American?  Take your choice  on the inference-original
one or that one. Both pretty bad. 

  So the  Times tells us us 4000 Americans have died  in Iraq, and there is an  Israeli flag in a  picture behind one of them. Subtle.  I read the  article-- there is not
a word about Israel.  So why the picture?

UPDATE: THEY MUST READ THE BLOGS! THEY HAVE SINCE SWITCHED THE PICTURE! HERE IS THE SCREEN CAPTURE!

Comments

[John D. Infidel]

I should be speechless. Someday soon this liberal fascist rag will be out of business.

[Josef K]

There is nothing wrong with going to war against a nation-state led by an anti-Semite fueling and funding terrorism, much less terrorism against an ally of America and a nation-state full of such noble people.

[yonason]

The out-of-control loonbat MSM

John, at Powerline, writes this...

"Over the last five years, we have witnessed something remarkable: our principal news media outlets have fabricated an alternative reality around the Iraq war by simply misreporting the facts. They have done this in order to advance their own political agenda. It is really quite extraordinary; someone should write a book about it."

And then there is this...

"Some of the reporters who cover the White House are such hyper-partisan Democrats that they are more or less crazed by hatred for the President and his administration. It is sobering to realize that these are the people from whom Americans get their "news" on the White House."

And now the NYSlimes is abandoneing any last semblance of sanity.

[yonason]

o.k., where's that picture from? I can't find it online.

here

or

here

...at least not till you get to photo #13. It's not like they put that one first, or made it the only one.

The NYSlimes is still often a disgusting Left-wing rag, but this isn't as bad as I was led to believe at first.

someone isn't jerking our chain, are they?

[Norm]

Since the first day of this war the NYTimes
has tried its best to not just oppose the war but to demoralize the American people and
military. I have come to expect it and realize that the people who run the paper do not understand that Iraq is a frontline in a dangerous war; and that Israel stands in the radical Muslim way of conquering the world.
Am I shocked that the paper would be so desperate to achieve its aims and its goals that it would intentionally give aid and ammunition to Jew haters?..no.
Now the Times goes further than trying to demoralize the American people...the paper actively seeks to divide us and make Americans hate each other. This does shock me and I am so disgusted. These people at the Times are truly pigs.

[sheik yer'mami]

This is revolting. Alternative reality? I think these swine are totally in the pocket of the enemy!

[Robert Goldberg]

My son is in the IDF... he is a traitor?

PS You attributed my article in the American Spectator to another blog who ran it whole cloth without giving me or the American Spectator credit....

[Pamela Geller]

Traitor? Who said traitor? We love the IDF, not sure where you are going.

The post you refer to did not attribute its souce to you- so there was no way for me to know but I will add the link.

Thanks for the correction. Great work

[syn]

It is extraordinary to witness how the owners of the NY Times, in their blind hatred of Bush and all things Republican, would become Israels' worst enemy.

When are those 80% of Americans in the Jewish community who vote, finance and stand behind the Democrat Party and its media organ the NY Times ever gong to get the concept that by betraying America, out of spitefulness towards Bush, they are in effect helping to bring about Israel's destruction?

I guess for those who buy into the cause of Collectivist tyranny brought about by the Clintons and the Obamas of the world is far more important than is the destruction of Israel.

[RobCon]

PLEASE let the New York Times go the same way as Bear Sterns! The Village Voice meeds competition as a left wing NY rag that you can't give away.