Yesterday, I wrote about the five very long articles that appeared in the New York Times which supported Obama's and Kerry's position on Israeli "settlements." One might expect them to back off back down; if so, one would be very wrong.

Today, here's an update: On December 30th, 2016, the very next day, the New York Times has three articles and five letters to the editor on the subject of Israel, “settlements,” Obama, Kerry, the UN, et al.

On page A4, Peter Baker defends Obama and Kerry from another point of view. In In ‘Red’ and ‘Blue’ Israel, Separate Lives and Divergent Narratives, he writes that Israelis themselves are divided about the settlements. Ipso Facto: Some Israelis like Obama and Kerry’s approach, some don’t. Nothing lost, no hard feelings, no harm done. Baker spends 1,139 words to present his point of view.

On page A 10, the entire page, from top to bottom, and from left to right, is entirely filled with two articles on the same subject.

The first one is: American Jews Divided Over Strain in U.S.-Israel Relations and is written by Adam Nagourney and Sharon Otterman, who spend 1,219 words in which they quote six Jews who oppose what Obama and Kerry have done and six Jews who support it. Their text supports the anti-Settlement point of view. There are three photos displayed on this page. One is of the notorious anti-Zionist group/cult known as the Neturai Karta, who dress like Hasids (religious Jews), are literally on Iran’s payroll, and probably need psychiatric medication and care.

Also on page A 10, a 1,256 word interview appears with Max Fisher. The title is: The Two-State Solution: What It Is and Why It Hasn’t Happened. It presents the “problem” as complicated but assures readers that all solutions other than the “two-state solution” are “unacceptable.”

Directly opposite, on page A 11, is the continuation of Peter Baker’s piece, In ‘Red’ and ‘Blue’ Israel, Separate Lives and Divergent Narratives.

Finally, there are the Letters to The Editor titled The Rift Between the U.S. and Israel. This totals 728 words.

I suppose one might view today’s issue as a slight improvement. Yesterday's word count, backing Obama and Kerry’s actions vis-à-vis Israel totaled 5,993 words. Today’s word count, which does the very same thing, comes to 5,323 words; it is 610 fewer words. A small blessing. Perhaps the NYT and their handlers believe that 11,316 words in a two-day period will be enough to protect Obama’s legacy and to keep Obama’s faithful flock ready to support his next act of war against Israel.

Clearly, Obama, Kerry, and their chief organ of propaganda, the NYT, are desperate, overly eager to make and to justify their anti-Settlement case—the very case that has, historically, doomed all efforts towards “peace.” In addition to Daniel Pipes’ piece, recommended here yesterday, please read Caroline Glick on this same subject.