A taxi passes by in front of The New York Times head office, Feb. 7, 2013. Photo: Reuters / Carlo Allegri / File.

It’s a classic antisemitic double standard. When Israelis use heated rhetoric about Hamas, the New York Times raises alarm bells. But when American “progressives” call Jews “cancer,” the Times either ignores it or itself is among the perpetrators.

A “guest essay” in the Times by Omer Bartov, a professor of “Holocaust and genocide studies” at Brown University, denounced what he called “deeply alarming language,” statements that he said “indicate a genocidal intent.”

Bartov writes, “On Oct. 9, Israel’s defense minister, Yoav Gallant, said, ‘We are fighting human animals and we are acting accordingly,’ a statement indicating dehumanization, which has genocidal echoes. The next day, the head of the Israeli Army’s coordinator of government activities in the territories, Maj. Gen. Ghassan Alian, addressed the population of Gaza in Arabic: ‘Human animals must be treated as such.'”

Leave aside whether calling someone a “human animal,” rather than merely an animal or an inhuman animal, really does indicate “dehumanization.” And leave aside, too, that Alian is an Israeli Druze, which the Times doesn’t mention, perhaps because it complicates the narrative the newspaper is pushing of Jewish racism.

In addition to the “guest essay,” the Times mobilized its London bureau chief, Mark Landler, to catch up to the opinion piece by manufacturing an entire news article about what a headline called “Inflammatory Rhetoric From Israeli Leaders.”

Landler’s first example is that same “human animals” quote from Gallant that is mentioned in Bartov’s op-ed. Landler also faults a former Israeli prime minister, Naftali Bennett, for declaring, “We’re fighting Nazis.” Landler doesn’t mention that Israelis in Gaza discovered an Arabic-language copy of Hitler’s Mein Kampf in a children’s room in a civilian home in Gaza that was used as a Hamas headquarters. Landler also doesn’t mention that Hamas’ covenant aspires to kill all the Jews (“there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.”)

The Times has also been quite assertive recently about denouncing Donald Trump’s rhetoric. One Times news article was about Donald Trump’s promise to “root out the communists, Marxists, fascists, and the radical left thugs that live like vermin within the confines of our country.” That article reported, “The former president’s remarks drew criticism from some liberals and historians who pointed to echoes of dehumanizing rhetoric wielded by fascist dictators like Hitler and Benito Mussolini.” The Times followed up with a second news article, on the front page, reporting, “Mr. Trump used language that echoed authoritarian leaders who rose to power in Germany and Italy in the 1930s, degrading his political adversaries as ‘vermin’ who needed to be ‘rooted out.'”

Where does the double standard come in?

A Democratic congressman from Wisconsin, Mark Pocan, denounced a largely Jewish pro-Israel lobbying group, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, as “cancerous to democracy” and as “a cancerous presence on our democracy and politics in general.” The Times hasn’t reported on it. Instead, the Times quoted Pocan about AIPAC without mentioning his use of the cancer slur.

Times columnist Nicholas Kristof, who left the paper for a while in an attempt to run for governor of Oregon as a Democrat, recently called Israeli settlements and “violent settlers” a “cancer on the region.” (“It’s imperative that Israel freeze settlements and rein in violent settlers, for they are a cancer on the region,” was the precise sentence, which mixes the metaphor, because one reins in a horse, not a cancer.)

So long as the Times is on high-alert for “dehumanizing rhetoric” with “genocidal echoes,” why give a pass to language that compares Jews to cancer? Such language has a long and unfortunate history. The US Holocaust Memorial Museum’s collections include an “antisemitic propaganda flyer” acquired by a Jewish child in France between 1942 and 1945. It compares Jews to tuberculosis, syphilis, and cancer. A “fact sheet on the elements of antisemitic discourse,” prepared by Kenneth Marcus of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, notes that “in Nazi Germany, Jewishness was often compared to a cancer.”

Susan Sontag, in her 1978 book Illness as Metaphor, writes, “Modern totalitarian movements, whether of the right or of the left, have been peculiarly — and revealingly — inclined to use disease imagery … European Jewry was repeatedly analogized to syphilis, and to a cancer that must be excised.” Sontag writes that using cancer as a metaphor “amount to saying, first of all, that the event or situation is unqualifiedly and unredeemably wicked. It enormously ups the ante.”

Sontag writes: “To describe a phenomenon as a cancer is an incitement to violence … It could be argued that the cancer metaphors are in themselves implicitly genocidal.”

Sontag notes that “the standard metaphor of Arab polemics — heard by Israelis on the radio every day for the last twenty years — is that Israel is ‘a cancer in the heart of the Arab world’ or ‘the cancer of the Middle East.'”

And Sontag adds, “The cancer metaphor is particularly crass. It is invariably an encouragement to simplify what is complex and an invitation to self-righteousness, if not to fanaticism.”

It’s sad to see coming from Kristof, who was identified in 2011 by the former mayor of New York, Ed Koch, as “truly an enemy of Israel.” If the Times is going to get into the business of raising alarms about Israeli rhetoric or about language with echoes of authoritarianism, it might want to be a little more careful about its own and about that of its allies on the left. Otherwise, the Times‘ concerns just look like unprincipled partisanship or Israel-bashing.

Ira Stoll was managing editor of The Forward and North American editor of The Jerusalem Post. His media critique, a regular Algemeiner feature, can be found here.