Yesterday President Trump announced phase one of a peace deal that will bring about a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, as well as a release of the hostages the terrorists in Gaza still hold.
When it comes to the hostage release, the New York Times seems to be sending a warning to Hamas and this almost sounds like it could have been written by Rashida Tlaib.
Get a load of this:
What on Earth is the New York Times thinking with this framing? pic.twitter.com/SV0McyXzSX
— Steve McGuire (@sfmcguire79) October 9, 2025
Link: https://t.co/vVe8ZMoSfz
— Steve McGuire (@sfmcguire79) October 9, 2025
Well, gee, the Times wouldn't want Hamas to take a risk now, would they?
Hamas took a significant risk by agreeing to release the remaining hostages in Gaza, giving up much of the leverage it has with Israel with no certainty that it would achieve all of what it wanted in return.
The Palestinian militant group had long said it was willing to release all the hostages in exchange for the complete withdrawal of Israeli military forces from Gaza, a permanent end to the war and the release of Palestinian prisoners. The deal reached on Thursday only guarantees one of those three things: the prisoner release.
Recommended
Isn't is strange how the Israelis releasing nearly 2,000 "Palestinian prisoners" might pose a potential risk to Israel but it's not framed that way in the Times' story.
The New York Times refers to hostages as "leverage." pic.twitter.com/EZvrKogW7P
— Stephen L. Miller (@redsteeze) October 9, 2025
Just when you think the New York Times has peaked, they prove you wrong.
It’s a real mystery why @bariweiss left. https://t.co/PlhAkKwevX
— The Durham Report (@TheDurhamReport) October 9, 2025
Yeah, no kidding.
There's no bottom. https://t.co/AZjbIahghv
— ┈ Agent FUBAR ┈ (@AgentFUBAR) October 9, 2025
The Times (and many other media outlets) continue to search for the bottom.
*****