Israel

Reporting protest

From our UK edition

Anyone who has ever been on a protest march or felt the heady frission of student rebelliousness should check out Hugo Rifkind's piece in the Times today. A really subtle piece of reporting, with no hint of the usual establishment sneer. What's fascinating about his observations the history of student revolt is how similar the present wave of sit-ins is to the protests of the past. The latest generation of student revolutionaries use the Israeli action in Gaza as their starting point but their real gripe is with global capitalism. They know as little about the realities of life in Isreal's occupied territories as their precursors in the 1968 "events" knew about Vietnam. Their unwitting alliance with the Islamic extreme right is unfortunate.

Concerned about Obama?

From our UK edition

Via Yglesias, here's a charming leaflet from the Republican Jewish Committee that helps demonstrate just why the GOP deserves - even needs - to lose on Tuesday. Nice touch too, that the photograph used shows Barack Obama speaking in Germany. Obviously Obama is, rather oddly, Adolf Hitler and Neville Chamberlain. Equally obviously, it scarcely needs saying that Neville Chamberlain was not in fact to blame for the Holocaust.

Why oh why oh why indeed?

From our UK edition

Is this Glenn Reynolds post a plea for more coverage of Tibet or less of Palestine? GOOD QUESTION:  Why Do Palestinians Get Much More Attention than Tibetans? But, just perhaps, the Israel-Palestine question receives lots of coverage because it's a question, at root, of competing rights, not because the media has an incurably anti-Israeli bias or is, in this instance at any rate, acting in an especially hypocritical fashion. The other answer, of course, is that readers, are much more interested in the Middle East than they are in China and Tibet and, consequently, this is just market forces at work. Shocking!

Hold the foreign page…

From our UK edition

Matt Yglesias writes:              People often note that there appears to be a more vigorous debate over Israel's approach to the Israeli-Arab conflict in the mainstream Israeli press than there is in the mainstream American press. This is, however, the kind of judgment that it's hard for a casual American observer to make with much confidence. Writing in International Security, however, Jerome Slater takes a more systematic comparison of coverage of the conflict in The New York Times and in Haaretz and concludes that, indeed, Israelis debate this matter more freely. To which Megan responds: 1)  No one in Israel is worried about being called anti-semitic.

Supper with Rupert

From our UK edition

I've defended Rupert Murdoch's purchase of the Wall Street Journal, but that's not an endorsement of his political sensitivity. From the Campbell diaries: Thursday January 17th, 2002:Murdoch was coming in for dinner and... brought James and Lachlan [his sons]...Murdoch was at one point putting the traditional very right-wing view on Israel and the Middle East peace process and James said that he was 'talking fucking nonsense'. Murdoch said he didn't see what the Palestinians' problem was and James said it was that they were kicked out of their fucking homes and had nowhere to fucking live. Murdoch was very pro-Israel, very pro-Reagan.