Scared by BDS'ers, al-Guardian rejects Dershowitz ad on Hamas tactics
Al-Guardian has rejected an ad on Hamas tactics by Harvard University law professor Alan Dershowitz because, among other things, it called into question the status of Gaza as '
the most densely populated area on earth' (Hat Tip:
Haaretz).
“The British media is divided,” Dershowitz said in an interview. “But The Guardian,
which holds itself out to be a purveyor of diverse truth, clearly
reflects a bias against Israel on its editorial pages, as well as in its
presentation of the news. Now that bias has spread to the advertising
pages.”
The advertisement was based on an older editorial written by
Dershowitz for the Gatestone Institute and was sponsored by the Wechsler
Family Foundation, which had offered The Guardian
approximately $21,000 to run the piece, a New York City-based agency
specializing in overseas advertisement placements confirmed.
Dershowitz told JNS.org that newspapers “have a right to decide which ads to accept and reject,” but questioned The Guardian’s decision not to run his advertorial.
“My column was factually sound and not a personal attack on anybody.
It simply laid out the geographic facts of the Gaza Strip and its
implications,” he said.
“Dershowitz was presenting a new point of view in this article,” Harry Wechsler of the Wechsler Family Foundation told JNS.org in an email.
“Hamas was not forced into shooting their rockets from pads located
in urban areas, thereby leading to unavoidable civilian deaths,” wrote
Wechsler. “They were not shooting from some of the densest population
centers anywhere because they had no other choice. No—the choice was
there. Though not large, Gaza had ample space that was not densely
populated—farm land, empty spaces where rockets could have been stored
and shot from. Furthermore, the U.N. could easily have developed
temporary quarters in these same spaces for the sheltering of civilian
refugees, far away from the sites of battle.”
The editorial board of The Guardian, which screens political
or issues-based advertisements before they are published in the
newspaper, “turned us down and refused to take our ad, even after
working with their people for several days,” according to Wechsler.
In response to a comment request by JNS.org regarding The Guardian’s decision not to publish the Dershowitz advertisement, a spokesperson for the newspaper said, “The Guardian reserves the right to reject any advertisement.”
You might recall that last week, al-Guardian
ran an ad by Eli Wiesel which had been
rejected by the Times of London. What you may not know is that as a result of running that ad, al-Guardian received 140 complaints and felt obligated to issue a
clarification related to that ad.
A spokesperson for Guardian News & Media, which owns the
Guardian, said: "The decision to run any display advertisement in the
Guardian is made on a case-by-case basis and there was a full discussion
about accepting the advert in question.
"However, the acceptance of advertising
from any organisation does not equate to support or endorsement for the
views expressed in that advert. The Guardian is fully committed to
reporting from the Middle East and our coverage will continue to be
independent and robust."
Who says writing letters to the editor doesn't make a difference? It scared the Guardian out of making the same 'mistake' with Dershowitz that it made with Wiesel.
Read the whole thing.
Labels: al-Guardian, Alan Dershowitz, civilian casualties, Elie Wiesel, Gaza, Hamas, human shields, Times of London
Guardian runs Wiesel ad against Hamas' child sacrifice
This is a bit of a surprise. The Guardian has run an
ad against child sacrifice by Elie Wiesel and Rabbi Shmuely Boteach. The ad had previously been
rejected by the Times of London. This is from the first link.
The ad was rejected by The Times, which claimed by way of
explanation "that the opinion being expressed is too strong and too
forcefully made and will cause concern amongst a significant number of Times readers'."
The advert has already run in a number of major US publications, including The Times' sister publication, the Wall Street Journal, as well as The New York Times and The Washington Post.
But the decision to run it in the Guardian - which is
well-known for its hostile editorial line towards Israel - will come as
particularly surprising, and raises further questions about The Times' decision not to run it.
Condemning the decision by The Times to reject the ad, Rabbi Boteach accused the paper of "catering to bigotry."
The Guardian and the Independent are the last two British papers I would have expected to run that ad.
Labels: al-Guardian, British anti-Semitism, civilian casualties, Elie Wiesel, Gaza, Hamas, human shields, Palestinian children, Rabbi Shmuely Boteach, Times of London
Times of London rejects ad from Elie Wiesel
A full-page advertisement from Elie Wiesel and Rabbi Shmuly Boteach, which calls on Hamas to reject child sacrifice, and which has run in several newspapers in the United States, has been rejected by the Times of London, which claimed that the ad was '
too strong and forceful.'
The ad sponsored by The Values Network, which was founded by Rabbi
Shmuley Boteach, has run in The New York Times, Washington Post and
The Wall Street Journal, among other U.S. newspapers. The rejection was
first reported by the New York Observer.
The London Times refused the ad because “the opinion being expressed
is too strong and too forcefully made and will cause concern amongst a
significant number of Times readers,” according to a statement from a representative of the newspaper, the Observer reported.
...
Headlined “Jews rejected child sacrifice 3,500 years ago. Now it’s
Hamas turn,” the ad began running last week. It reads, in part: “In my
own lifetime, I have seen Jewish children thrown into the fire. And now I
have seen Muslim children used as human shields, in both cases, by
worshippers of death cults indistinguishable from that of the
Molochites.
“What we are suffering through today is not a battle of Jew versus
Arab or Israeli versus Palestinian. Rather, it is a battle between those
who celebrate life and those who champion death. It is a battle of
civilization versus barbarism.”
Countering the London Times statement, Boteach said in his own, “Elie
Wiesel is one of the most respected human beings alive, a Nobel Peace
Laureate, and is the living face of the Holocaust. No greater expert on
genocide exists in the whole world. His call for the end of child
sacrifice by Hamas, who use children as human shields, and a stop to
their genocidal charter, which calls for the murder of Jews everywhere,
could only offend the sensibilities of the most die-hard anti-Israel
haters and anti-Semites.”
I can't envision a single newspaper in the the UK (other than the local Jewish newspaper) running an ad like this. Maybe the Telegraph or the Mail, but I doubt they would run it either. Who says there's media bias out there?
Labels: British anti-Semitism, civilian casualties, Elie Wiesel, Gaza, Hamas, human shields, Palestinian children, Rabbi Shmuely Boteach, Times of London
Report: Saudi intelligence chief meets with Israeli counterpart... and with J Street?
Take this with a grain of salt, because the source is Iranian, but Iran's FARS News is reporting that Saudi intelligence chief Prince Bandar al-Sultan
met in Geneva last month with his Israeli counterpart. From there, it gets comical.
Mujtahid, a whistleblower who is well connected with the inner circles
of the Saudi secret service, revealed through his twitter account that
Prince Bandar has met his Israeli counterpart and several other
high-ranking Israeli officials in Geneva on November 27.
He said that Prince Bandar and Israeli officials have agreed on a
number of crucial issues, including “containing Iran by any possible
means, exercising stronger control over Syria’s Jihadist forces,
sidelining Muslim Brotherhood and stopping the waves of the Arab
spring".
Different sources had told FNA in September that Prince Bandar’s envoy
had been in Geneva to explore ways of enticing the world powers into
war on Syria in a series of meeting with the executive director of a
very influential Zionist lobby.
"The latest meeting between Riyadh al-Tamimi and Jeremy Ben-Ami, the
executive of J Street lobby, was held in Geneva on August 20, during
which the two sides discussed the latest developments in Syria, ways to
strengthen militants fighting against President Bashar al-Assad and
proper methods of persuading the US officials to wage a war against
Syria," an informed Saudi source present in most of the meetings told
FNA in September.
J Street - the main Jewish opponent to sanctions against Iran - is trying to get the US to wage war on Syria? You've got to be smoking something....
J Street, a US Jewish lobby is widely thought to be American Israel
Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC)’s rival. J Street Director Jeremy
Ben-Ami has announced that as a pro-Israel lobby the group works for
Israel’s benefit and has underlined its commitment to Israel.
And the Iranians are dumb enough to believe that?
The source, who asked to remain unnamed due to the sensitivity of his
information, also said that like the Saudi officials, specially Prince
Bandar, J Street has made use of all its possibilities and potentials in
recent months to coax the US political and military officials into
limited military operations against Syria's sensitive and vital regions.
I can think of some other reasons that the source might want to remain unnamed....
And from the 'make sure you get this into Google Cache before they can take it down department, the JPost is actually
carrying this as a credible story, leaving out the parts about J Street. Of course the Post is using the Sunday Times of London as its 'credible' source....
According to a report in The Sunday Times from last month, Riyadh gave its consent for Israel to use Saudi airspace for a potential attack on Iran.
The Times report came out before the nuclear deal between Iran and the world powers was reached. Both Jerusalem and Riyadh expressed displeasure at the deal being formulated.
The
paper quoted a diplomatic source as saying the Saudis were willing to
assist an Israeli attack by cooperating on the use of drones, rescue
helicopters and tanker planes.
“Once the Geneva agreement is
signed, the military option will be back on the table. The Saudis are
furious and are willing to give Israel all the help it needs,” the Times quoted the source as saying.
If you're dumb enough to use the
Sunday Times of London as a
credible source on anything having to do with
Israel, you deserve what you get. Anyone want to take bets on how long this story stays up at the JPost site?
Labels: Iranian nuclear threat, J Street, Mossad, our friends the Saudis, Prince Bandar al-Sultan, Syria, Times of London, Uzi Mahnaimi
Surprise: IDF Brig. Gen. calls Sunday Times of London report on Syria 'not credible' and 'far-fetched'
The Sunday Times of London is reporting that Syria has batteries of
Tishreen missiles aimed at Tel Aviv for use if Israel attacks Syrian weapons sites. But an Israeli Brigadier General is calling the report '
not credible' and 'far-fetched.'
According to the Sunday Times,
reconnaissance satellites have revealed preparations made by the Syrian
army to deploy surface-to-surface Tishreen missiles. Syrian President
Bashar Assad, the report said, is ready to use these missiles should
Israel decide to conduct a strike on Damascus.
The paper quotes Israeli missile export Uzi Rubin as saying Syria has
a lot of Tishreen missiles at its disposal, and that should they fire
them at Israel, they could potentially paralyze all commercial flights
coming in and out of the country.
"Our polices are to stop, as
much as possible, any leaks of advanced weaponry to Hezbollah and other
terrorist organizations. We will continue to act to ensure the security
interests of the citizens of Israels," Netanyahu stressed.
IDF spokesman Brig.-Gen. Yoav Mordechai took to his Facebook page on Sunday to criticize the Sunday Times report, calling it "not credible" and "far fetched."
"The
IDF continues to follow any scenario and be prepared to any scenario,
in the northern border as well as any other border, which doesn't leave
us with much time to speculate about the future," Mordechai wrote.
The
report comes amidst a great deal of uncertainty surrounding the Middle
East and Syria in particular after Israel allegedly carried out two airstrikes on several targets in Syria earlier this month.
Israel declined to confirm the strikes so as not to pressure Syrian
President Bashar Assad into serious retaliation, according to a
confidant of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu.
However, Israel Radio reported this morning that the United States has apologized to Israel for disclosing that Israel was behind the strikes on Damascus two weeks ago. More in the next post.
Labels: Bashar al-Assad, Hezbullah, Syria, Tel Aviv, Times of London
The business of hate
The Algemeiner's cartoonist
responds to the Sunday Times' anti-Semitic cartoon (pictured above).
Labels: anti-Semitism, mainstream media, Times of London
Rupert Miurdoch apologizes for anti-Semitic cartoon
The Sunday Times of London is
having a hard time coming up with a real apology for that
anti-Semitic cartoon in Sunday's edition, so owner Rupert Murdoch has apologized for them. See the tweet above.
Labels: anti-Semitism, Holocaust Memorial Day, Rupert Murdoch, Times of London
Sunday Times of London defends anti-Semitic cartoon as 'typically robust'
The Sunday Times of London has defended an anti-Semitic
cartoon it published on Holocaust Memorial Day, which shows Prime Minister Netanyahu supervising the construction of a wall with people trapped inside, as '
typically robust.'
“This is a typically robust cartoon by Gerald Scarfe,” said
a spokesperson for The Sunday Times, adding, “The Sunday Times firmly
believes that it is not anti-Semitic. It is aimed squarely at Mr
Netanyahu and his policies, not at Israel, let alone at Jewish people.”
The spokesperson said that appearance of the offending cartoon on
Holocaust Memorial Day which is commemorated Sunday was coincidental,
“It appears today because Mr Netanyahu won the Israeli election last
week,” said the statement.
If anyone still reads it, I think a boycott of the Sunday Times would be appropriate.
Labels: Binyamin Netanyahu, British anti-Semitism, Times of London
The Sunday Times of London marks Holocaust Memorial Day with a despicable anti-Semitic cartoon
Sunday, January 27, today, is the United Nations' annual Holocaust Memorial Day, which is observed throughout the world, and especially in Europe.
The cartoon at the top left of this post was deemed appropriate for the day and was published by the Sunday Times of London (which once upon a time was one of London's less anti-Semitic papers, alongside the Telegraph) in honor of the occasion. That's Prime Minister Netanyahu sitting on top of the wall. At the bottom of the wall, it says 'Israeli elections.' And all the way at the bottom it asks '
Will cementing peace continue?" This is Raheem Kassam at the Commentator.
Last week, it was Member of Parliament David Ward MP,
the case of whom highlights an ever growing contingent of anti-Israel
sentiment within the British government. These are the fools who would
have you believe that Israel’s security barrier is 100 percent concrete,
100 feet tall, and built from the blood of Palestinians.
And who could possibly blame them for having this ill-informed idea,
when their fellow MPs invite them to one-sided trips to the West Bank
while at the same time referring to Hamas and Hezbollah as ‘friends’ (more on this tomorrow).
But more to the point, who can blame them when some of the country’s
smartest media outlets present Israel and its leaders in this particular
light: the large-nosed Jew, hunched over a wall, building with the
blood of Palestinians as they writhe in pain within it.
For this is exactly what the Sunday Times has today done; not simply treading the fine line between criticism and blood libel, but indeed spitting all over it, leaving it for dust, and careering head first into anti-Semitismsville.
“Will cementing peace continue?” reads the caption beneath the image of
a Quasimodo-like Netanyahu. As if this half-hearted attempt at a pun
would help masquerade the overt racism within the image. No.
In conversation with a friend of mine recently, I was asked, “Do you
think in 200 years time, people will have forgotten the Holocaust, or
believe that it was a myth?” I naively responded, “No. I believe there
are enough good people in the world to ensure that doesn’t happen.” At
the time, I would never have thought the editors of the Sunday Times
were in amongst those who would seek, in true Der Sturmer fashion, to
use Holocaust Memorial Day to publish a blood libel, and knowingly
undermine the memory of one of the worst genocides ever.
I guess I was wrong on that count. I sure hope I’m not wrong on the other.
Is anyone really surprised? Britain did more than any other country in the world to prevent the establishment of the Jewish state. It did more than any other country outside of Germany to perpetrate the Holocaust by preventing Jews from emigrating to the Jewish homeland. The only thing that's changed in the last 65 years is that Islam has come to Britain where it's been welcomed by the multicultural chattering classes who find it exotic....
Look for Britain to go the way of Somalia in the not-too-distant future. I only hope its Jews wake up and leave in time.
Labels: Binyamin Netanyahu, British anti-Semitism, Times of London
Times of London uses Hanin Zoabi to represent Israel
I'll bet you don't visit the Times of London site anymore since they put up that awful paywall. I don't either. But fortunately, someone still gets the hard copy, because otherwise we might have missed this
appalling example of media bias.
Dear Sirs
James Hider's full page article "Israel isolation grows as ambassador thrown out over blockade ship raid" is one of the most ignorant and biased reports ever written in the Times.
The main findings of the Palmer report, which the article is supposed to be about, were that Israel's naval blockade of Gaza was legal and that Turkey had colluded with a terrorist organisation - the IHH - to breach this legal blockade. Yet the article focuses on the one, relatively small, part of the Palmer report which is critical of Israel (it said Israeli commandos used "excessive and unacceptable force"). Having failed to either present the Israeli case or quote a single Israeli source anywhere else in the article, Hider ends with the following:The report's finding that the blockade is legitimate was rejected by Hanin Zoabi of the Israeli parliament, who called for "those who sent the army to stop the flotilla [to] be brought before international tribunals"
What Hider fails to inform his readers is that Zoabi is an Arab member of Parliament who is dedicated to the destruction of Israel and who was actually on the Mavi Mamura with the Turkish IHH terrorists - an act which rightly got her suspended from Parliament.
Read the whole thing.
While this is one of the most blatant examples of this sort of bias that I have seen, it is unfortunately quite common for the media (and academia) to 'balance' reports and forums by taking 'Israeli representatives' who are anti-Israel.
Labels: British media bias, Hanin Zoabi, Mavi Marmara, Times of London
