Thread by @GileadIni

BDS: We want to get rid of Israel.
NYT: Right, you want to end the occupation.
BDS: No, we said *all* of Israel.
NYT: Oh, sorry. BDS wants to end the occupation.
BDS: NO! We demand to replace the Jewish state with a Palestinian one.
NYT: Occupation?
BDS: End Isra–
NYT: …pation!

In the replies, someone does exactly what the NYT does. 1) They ignore BDS's 3rd demand, a so-called right of return that proponents openly acknowledge is meant to end Israel. And 2) they ignore admissions by BDS leaders themselves about their goal.

Why?

https://twitter.com/legalobserver1/status/1417563799238873095

3/ "To put it quite clearly, the intention is the extermination of Israel," a foreign minister of Egypt once explained about a "return."

camera.org/article/noura-…

4/ Today, BDS leader Omar Barghouti today says the same: "a return for refugees would end Israel’s existence as a Jewish state."

His goal, he's explained, is "unitary state, where, by definition, Jews will be a minority." camera.org/article/new-yo…

Also helpful. tabletmag.com/sections/news/…

Here, by the way, is the inexcusably misleading language from the NYT's Ben & Jerry's story:

"Among other goals."

The NYT has a history of whitewashing BDS. But the paper has gotten it right once or twice.

Here's a 2019 article in the NYT itself. It would be inexcusable for the newspaper not to know this about BDS. To know it and not report it might be worse.