|
|
|
|
For our donors from the UK:
|
|
|
|
| Recent Publications by New English Review Authors |
.jpg) |
The Literary Culture of France
by J. E. G. Dixon |
 |
Hamlet Made Simple and Other Essays
by David P. Gontar |
 |
Farewell Fear
by Theodore Dalrymple |
.jpg) |
The Eagle and The Bible: Lessons in Liberty from Holy Writ
by Kenneth Hanson |
 |
The West Speaks
interviews by Jerry Gordon |
%20(2).jpg) |
Mohammed and Charlemagne Revisited: The History of a Controversy
Emmet Scott |
 |
Why the West is Best: A Muslim Apostate's Defense of Liberal Democracy
Ibn Warraq |
 |
Anything Goes
by Theodore Dalrymple |
 |
Karimi Hotel
De Nidra Poller |
 |
The Left is Seldom Right
by Norman Berdichevsky |
 |
Allah is Dead: Why Islam is Not a Religion
by Rebecca Bynum |
 |
Virgins? What Virgins?: And Other Essays
by Ibn Warraq |
 |
An Introduction to Danish Culture
by Norman Berdichevsky |
 |
The New Vichy Syndrome:
by Theodore Dalrymple |
 |
Jihad and Genocide
by Richard L. Rubenstein |
 |
Second Opinion
by Theodore Dalrymple |
 |
Not With a Bang But a Whimper: The Politics and Culture of Decline
by Theodore Dalrymple |
 |
In Praise of Prejudice: The Necessity of Preconceived Ideas
by Theodore Dalrymple |
 |
Defending The West:
by Ibn Warraq |
 |
Nations, Language and Citizenship:
by Norman Berdichevsky |
 |
Romancing Opiates
by Theodore Dalrymple |
 |
Which Koran?
by Ibn Warraq |
 |
Our Culture, What's Left of It
by Theodore Dalrymple |
 |
What The Koran Really Says
by Ibn Warraq |
 |
Life at the Bottom
by Theodore Dalrymple |
 |
The Origins of the Koran
by Ibn Warraq |
 |
Why I Am Not Muslim
by Ibn Warraq |
 |
Spanish Vignettes: An Offbeat Look Into Spain's Culture, Society & History
by Norman Berdichevsky |
 |
Leaving Islam
Edited by Ibn Warraq |
 |
The Danish-German Border Dispute, 1815-2001: Aspects of Cultural and Demographic Politics
by Norman Berdichevsky |
 |
What's Love Got to Do with It?: Emotions and Relationships in Pop Songs
by Thomas J. Scheff |
.jpg)   .jpg) .jpg) 
|
Saturday, 17 December 2011
Netanyahu Rejects That Hollow Offer From The New York Times
From The New York Post:
Netanyahu to ‘New York Times’: Take a hike
By HERB KEINON
12/16/2011
Prime minister "respectfully declines" to pen an op-ed piece for 'NYT' citing newspapers negative spin on Netanyahu government.
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is refusing to pen an op-ed piece for The New York Times, signaling the degree to which he is fed up with the influential newspaper’s editorial policy on Israel.
In a letter to the Times obtained by The Jerusalem Post on Thursday, Netanyahu’s senior adviser Ron Dermer – in response to the paper’s request that Netanyahu write an op-ed – wrote that the prime minister would “respectfully decline.”
Dermer made clear that this had much to do with the fact that 19 of the paper’s 20 op-ed pieces on Israel since September were negative.
Ironically, the one positive piece was written by Richard Goldstone – chairman of the UN’s Goldstone Commission Report – defending Israel against charges of apartheid.
“We wouldn’t want to be seen as ‘Bibiwashing’ the op-ed page of The New York Times,” Dermer said, in reference to a piece called “Israel and Pinkwashing” from November. In that piece, a City University of New York humanities professor lambasted Israel for, as Dermer wrote, “having the temerity to champion its record on gay rights.”
That piece, he wrote, “set a new bar that will be hard for you to lower in the future.”
Dermer’s letter came a day after NYT columnist Thomas Friedman wrote that the resounding ovation Netanyahu received in Congress when he spoke there in May had been “bought and paid for by the Israel lobby.”
With Friedman clearly – but not solely – among those in mind, Dermer wrote that “the opinions of some of your regular columnists regarding Israel are well known. They constantly distort the positions of our government and ignore the steps it has taken to advance peace. They cavalierly defame our country by suggesting that marginal phenomena condemned by Prime Minister Netanyahu, and virtually every Israeli official, somehow reflect government policy or Israeli society as a whole.”
Dermer also took the paper to task for running an op-ed piece by Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas in May that asserted that shortly after the UN voted for the partition of Palestine in November 1947, “Zionist forces expelled Palestinian Arabs to ensure a decisive Jewish majority in the future state of Israel, and Arab armies intervened. War and further expulsions ensued.”
Those lines, Dermer wrote, “effectively turn on its head an event within living memory in which the Palestinians [i.e., local Arabs] rejected the UN partition plan accepted by the Jews, and then joined five Arab states in launching a war to annihilate the embryonic Jewish state. It should not have made it past the most rudimentary fact-checking.”
That it did find its way into the op-ed pages of the “paper of record,” he wrote, showed the degree to which the paper had not internalized former senator Daniel Moynihan’s admonition that “everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but... no one is entitled to their own facts.”
Furthermore, Dermer wrote, the paper’s sole positive piece about Israel since September – the Goldstone piece rejecting the apartheid charges – “came a few months after your paper reportedly rejected Goldstone’s previous submission. In that earlier piece, which was ultimately published in The Washington Post, the man who was quoted the world over for alleging that Israel had committed war crimes in Gaza fundamentally changed his position. According to The New York Times op-ed page, that was apparently news unfit to print.”
Dermer wrote that the paper’s refusal to run positive pieces about Israel was not because they were in short supply. In fact, he said he understood that in September the paper had turned down a piece cowritten by House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Virginia) and Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-Maryland), expressing bipartisan support for direct Israeli-Palestinian negotiations and opposition to the PA’s statehood gambit at the UN.
“In an age of intense partisanship, one would have thought that strong bipartisan support for Israel on such a timely issue would have made your cut,” he wrote.
Meanwhile, Rep. Steve Rothman (D-New Jersey) called on Friedman to apologize for saying the congressional ovation Netanyahu received in May was “bought and paid for by the Israel lobby.”
Rothman said he gave Netanyahu a standing ovation not because of “any nefarious lobby,” but because it is in the US’s vital strategic interest to support Israel.
“Thomas Friedman’s defamation against the vast majority of Americans who support the Jewish state of Israel is scurrilous, destructive and harmful to Israel and her advocates in the US,” Rothman said. “Friedman is not only wrong, but he’s aiding and abetting a dangerous narrative about the US-Israel relationship and its American supporters.”
Posted on 12/17/2011 7:24 AM by Hugh Fitzgerald
Comments
No comments yet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Most Recent Posts at The Iconoclast
Search The Iconoclast
The Iconoclast Posts by Author
The Iconoclast Archives
Subscribe
|
|
.jpg)
