The Financial Times' difficulty facing reality
Noah Pollak on a report by Just Journalism, a British media watchdog I have mentioned before, on editorials in London's Financial Times. My favorite example of this (as is Marty Peretz’s) is the fact that the FT, as official policy, refers to Tel Aviv as the capital of Israel, a plain denial of reality. Can you imagine the FT referring, today, to Philadelphia or New York as the capital of the United States? That would be crazy. It would cause the FT to become a laughingstock. But it is really no more neurotic than the Tel Aviv rule.Maybe we should refer to Gateshead-on-Tyne as the capital of England?
Denying reality is not going to change it. And by the way, the World didn't 'accept' Jerusalem as our capital before 1967 either, so obviously the 'occupation' is not the issue.
posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 9:25 AM
3 Comments:
You wouldn't want the FT to put itself at risk of a fatwa in their own land by correctly locating the capital of Israel would you? Seriously, you have pointed to something so central to the life of Israel that no one should get it wrong. What's in a name? Historical fact - that's what.
It has to do with the fact the Jews run Jerusalem. The world doesn't appear to have ANY problems whatever with the Palestinian Arabs claiming Jerusalem as THEIR capital. There's really no secret - the world wants the Jews to stop claiming a city it wants to take away from them.
In other words, plain old fashioned anti-Semitism but no one will say it in polite company.
NormanF...Amen.
However, if George Bush would have made good on his campaign promise to sign the embassy act in his first week of office(which he squandered for 8 years )perhaps the issue of Jerusalem might not be such a horrible problem right now.
Every president, even the so-called more friendly ones would not declare Jerusalem the holy G-d given undivided capital of Israel. Pre-election campaign speak does not count. (if it even existed)
Most sadly when Bush was president everyone who voted him was way to partisan to criticize him for not signing the embassy act and now we pay.
Now we have Obama and we are really in for it!!
Post a Comment
<< Home