Following our communication with editors at Times of London, the article was amended, and new language was added noting that the proposed amendment – which they initially claimed was approved and had amended Israel’s Basic Law – was withdrawn.
Here is the basic question: Why is the Guardian more concerned about the possible future instability caused by Washington’s pullout from the Iran Deal than the actual death and destruction that Tehran is causing today in the Middle East?
Guardian opposed US attack on Syria in 2013; Now says inaction led to more bloodshed. Fails to admit error.
A recent Observer editorial is critical of Obama’s decision not to bomb Assad in 2013, but there is just one thing the editorial does not mention –that Observer editors, at the time, encouraged Obama NOT to take action.
The toxic charge that Israel (or Jews qua Jews) exercises a dangerous degree of control over US foreign policy or public opinion is sadly common within leftist discourse on the Middle East, and the fact that such invective have been published in a right-wing publication like The Spectator is another indication of the lure of such antisemitic logic among otherwise sober minds
Early this morning, The Economist tweeted the following link and photo to promote a featured story on their website (Fighting Talk, Sept. 5th) with the same image of ‘American Jewish protesters’, with the […]