IMAGINE IF – when Nazi Germany annexed most of Poland – Jonathan Freedland had reported that ‘Germany is holding urgent talks over the threat to its Warthegau border and attacks on the Reich city of Danzig from the Polish Home Army. Hitler
called the threats to the residents of Auschwitz/ Oswiecim from Polish terrorists ‘unacceptable aggression’
Readers’
Editor Chris Elliott’s Quibble over whether Illegally Annexed Territory can constitute a new border
 |
| Freedland sees himself as a foreign policy and Middle East expert. In fact he knows little or nothing about the Arab East or indeed Israel from the perspective of its Arab citizens. The Guardian got rid of people like David Hirst who were knowledgeable and today it is The Independent which has the legendary Robert Fisk and people like Patrick Cockburn. Since it was the Labour Zionists who settled the Golan Heights, Freedland doesn’t encourage recollections of the Golan’s legal status or the atrocities Israel carried out there. |
 |
| The Guardian finally gets it half-right (& half wrong!) |
 |
| Professor Moshe Machover – a long standing Israeli anti-Zionist and political opponent of all that Freedland stands for |
It began as a simple
correction 3 days ago from Professor Moshe Machover, an Israeli anti-Zionist and
founder of Matzpen and the Socialist Organisation in Israel. He pointed out that an article in The
Guardian (Israel and Russia discuss Syrian civil war, 22 September) had referred
to the Golan Heights as “bordering Syria”. Since the Golan Heights are
Syrian territory illegally annexed by Israel, it takes a particular pedanticism
to suggest that the Golan ‘borders’ the state of which it is a part.
correction 3 days ago from Professor Moshe Machover, an Israeli anti-Zionist and
founder of Matzpen and the Socialist Organisation in Israel. He pointed out that an article in The
Guardian (Israel and Russia discuss Syrian civil war, 22 September) had referred
to the Golan Heights as “bordering Syria”. Since the Golan Heights are
Syrian territory illegally annexed by Israel, it takes a particular pedanticism
to suggest that the Golan ‘borders’ the state of which it is a part.
When the Guardian had
not published or acknowledged the correction by the following day Moshe asked
why. I then wrote to the Guardian and I
received the following: Moshe was not
copied in!
not published or acknowledged the correction by the following day Moshe asked
why. I then wrote to the Guardian and I
received the following: Moshe was not
copied in!
———- Forwarded message ———-
From: “Letters” <[email protected]>
Date: 23 Sep 2015 16:05
Subject: Re: Pro-Israel guard at the Guardian?
To: “Tony Greenstein” <[email protected]>
From: “Letters” <[email protected]>
Date: 23 Sep 2015 16:05
Subject: Re: Pro-Israel guard at the Guardian?
To: “Tony Greenstein” <[email protected]>
Thanks for this. We are aware of this and the readers’
editor is looking into it.
editor is looking into it.
Many thanks,
Mike
The Guardian then
made the most sneaky of all corrections, by altering the original article
rather than posting the clarification on the letters page. The correction read ‘• ‘This article
was amended on 23 September 2015. An earlier version said that the Golan
Heights “bordered” Syrian territory. this has been corrected.’ No hint was given as to why there was a correction or the circumstances surrounding it.
made the most sneaky of all corrections, by altering the original article
rather than posting the clarification on the letters page. The correction read ‘• ‘This article
was amended on 23 September 2015. An earlier version said that the Golan
Heights “bordered” Syrian territory. this has been corrected.’ No hint was given as to why there was a correction or the circumstances surrounding it.
 |
| Moshe Machover speaking at the Hands of People of Iran conference |
As Moshe noted: ‘the “corrected” article still refers to
Netanyahu’s fear of “Syrian and Iranian
aggression in the Golan Heights,” as though Syria could be an aggressor against
Israel in Syrian territory…
Netanyahu’s fear of “Syrian and Iranian
aggression in the Golan Heights,” as though Syria could be an aggressor against
Israel in Syrian territory…
Moreover,
the “corrected” article refers to the Golan Heights as “Syrian territory but
occupied by Israel” – which avoids
the fact that the territory has been illegally annexed by Israel’ i.e. stolen.
the “corrected” article refers to the Golan Heights as “Syrian territory but
occupied by Israel” – which avoids
the fact that the territory has been illegally annexed by Israel’ i.e. stolen.
‘The
way the Guardian went about “correcting” its mis-reporting is clearly
calculated to draw as little attention to it as possible. Very few readers are
going to read online an article that is a couple of days out of date…
way the Guardian went about “correcting” its mis-reporting is clearly
calculated to draw as little attention to it as possible. Very few readers are
going to read online an article that is a couple of days out of date…
The
question arises: what is it that the Guardian is trying not to draw attention
to?’
question arises: what is it that the Guardian is trying not to draw attention
to?’
Moshe’s
conclusion was that
conclusion was that
‘someone quite senior in it – wishes to avoid drawing
attention to Israel’s illegal annexation, massive ethnic cleansing and
colonization of the Syrian Golan Heights.’
attention to Israel’s illegal annexation, massive ethnic cleansing and
colonization of the Syrian Golan Heights.’
 |
| Jonathan Freedland – Guardian’s resident Zionist Editor, possibly one of the most mediocre of the Guardian/Observer’s journalistic talents. Supporter of the New Labour Right, is a ‘liberal Zionist’ who always manages to end up supporting the Zionist Right. |
 |
| Ariel Sharon – the butcher of Sabra & Shatilla – Freedland claimed to oppose his version of Zionism but always managed to end up supporting Likud |
Given his role in purveying the continual lie that Jeremy Corbyn associates
with holocaust deniers and assorted anti-Semites, the identity of this person
is not hard to work out – step forward the talentless but arrogant senior editor, Jonathan Freedland, who has made the agonies of the liberal Zionist
into an art form. His conscience is always to the fore whilst always ensuring that he comes down on the side of the Zionist
Right whenever push gives way to shove.
with holocaust deniers and assorted anti-Semites, the identity of this person
is not hard to work out – step forward the talentless but arrogant senior editor, Jonathan Freedland, who has made the agonies of the liberal Zionist
into an art form. His conscience is always to the fore whilst always ensuring that he comes down on the side of the Zionist
Right whenever push gives way to shove.
 |
| Freedland dreamed that he was in love with a different, democratic and egalitarian Israel. And then he woke up. |
Throughout the campaign to elect a new Labour leader, Freedland has played the role of an echo chamber to the gutter accusations of ‘anti-Semitism’ by the editor of the Jewish Chronicle Stephen Pollard. Now it would seem that he is continuing to regale the same lies and distortions. Friends who are enemies
 |
| Jonathan Freedland and the Zionist Establishment’s Bete Noir. |
 |
| ex-Editor of the Daily Express, owned by Britain’s largest porn magnate Richard Desmond, now editor of the Jewish Chronicle, which he has ruined. Supporter of the attacks on Welfare. A cold war warrior and member of the Henry Jackson Society. He also bears a remarkable similarity to Kaminski. Blood brothers? |
It
takes a master of contortions to claim anti-racist and anti-fascist credentials
whilst occupying the same bed space as Jewish Chronicle editor, Stephen
Pollard. It was Pollard who, when the Tories and Cameron were
being attacked for forming the European Conservatives & Reform
Group, containing the far-right in the European Parliament, defended the leader
of that group, Michal Kaminski. Kaminski it was who campaigned against an
apology for the burning alive in 1941 of over 300 Jews in the village of Jedwabne by local Poles.
Kaminski insisted that it was Poland’s Jews, those 10% or less who had
escaped the holocaust who should do the
apologising!
 |
| Michal Kaminski MEP – a Zionist anti-Semite |
‘‘If you are asking the Polish nation to apologise for the
crime made in Jedwabne, you would require from the whole Jewish nation to
apologise for what some Jewish Communists did in Eastern Poland.’
The logic is impeccable, at least as far as Pollard was concerned, as he managed to write an article ‘‘Poland’s Kaminski is not an antisemite: he’s a friend to Jews’ without a hint or trace of irony. Such as the friends that Freedland keeps.
Correspondence re Guardian ‘Correction’
Dear Friend,
Today the Guardian
finally published a correction http://www.theguardian.com/news/2015/sep/24/corrections-and-clarifications
to its erroneous description of the Syrian Golan Heights – which Israel
illegally purported to annex – as “bordering Syria’.
finally published a correction http://www.theguardian.com/news/2015/sep/24/corrections-and-clarifications
to its erroneous description of the Syrian Golan Heights – which Israel
illegally purported to annex – as “bordering Syria’.
However,
‘The “correction” still refers to “a meeting between Binyamin Netanyahu,
the Israeli prime minister, and Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, to
discuss security concerns along Israel’s northern border”. This is an
uncorrected residue of the original error. What is referred to here
as “Israel’s northern border” is no such thing. It is the line dividing
the territory illegally occupied and colonized by Israel from the rest of
Syria.
‘The “correction” still refers to “a meeting between Binyamin Netanyahu,
the Israeli prime minister, and Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, to
discuss security concerns along Israel’s northern border”. This is an
uncorrected residue of the original error. What is referred to here
as “Israel’s northern border” is no such thing. It is the line dividing
the territory illegally occupied and colonized by Israel from the rest of
Syria.
Moshé
Machover
Machover
Dear Friend,
This is an update of
the story about the Guardian misreporting – see previous emails pasted
below.
the story about the Guardian misreporting – see previous emails pasted
below.
You may have noticed
that I changed the question mark in the Subject rubric to an exclamation mark.
This is because the Guardian did something really underhand and shameful – or
should I say shameless.
that I changed the question mark in the Subject rubric to an exclamation mark.
This is because the Guardian did something really underhand and shameful – or
should I say shameless.
It did not publish my
original letter (sent on 22 September).
original letter (sent on 22 September).
It did not publish a
correction in its Corrections and Clarifications column.
correction in its Corrections and Clarifications column.
Instead, it went back
to the online version of the original report and retrospectively corrected it,
adding a note:
to the online version of the original report and retrospectively corrected it,
adding a note:
“ • This article was amended on 23 September 2015. An
earlier version said that the Golan Heights “bordered” Syrian territory. this
has been corrected.”
earlier version said that the Golan Heights “bordered” Syrian territory. this
has been corrected.”
By the way, the
“corrected” article still refers to Netanyahu’s fear of “Syrian and Iranian aggression in the Golan Heights,” as
though Syria could be an aggressor against Israel in Syrian territory…
“corrected” article still refers to Netanyahu’s fear of “Syrian and Iranian aggression in the Golan Heights,” as
though Syria could be an aggressor against Israel in Syrian territory…
Moreover,
the “corrected” article refers to the Golan Heights as “Syrian territory but
occupied by Israel” – which avoids
the fact that the territory has been illegally annexed by Israel.
the “corrected” article refers to the Golan Heights as “Syrian territory but
occupied by Israel” – which avoids
the fact that the territory has been illegally annexed by Israel.
The
way the Guardian went about “correcting” its mis-reporting is clearly
calculated to draw as little attention to it as possible. Very few readers are
going to read online an article that is a couple of days out of date…
way the Guardian went about “correcting” its mis-reporting is clearly
calculated to draw as little attention to it as possible. Very few readers are
going to read online an article that is a couple of days out of date…
The
question arises: what is it that the Guardian is trying not to draw attention
to?
question arises: what is it that the Guardian is trying not to draw attention
to?
Given
that the Guardian is normally quite conscientious in correcting its own factual
errors, I conclude that it – or someone quite senior in it – wished to avoid
drawing attention to Israel’s illegal annexation, massive ethnic cleansing and
colonization of the Syrian Golan Heights.
that the Guardian is normally quite conscientious in correcting its own factual
errors, I conclude that it – or someone quite senior in it – wished to avoid
drawing attention to Israel’s illegal annexation, massive ethnic cleansing and
colonization of the Syrian Golan Heights.
Moshé
Machover
Machover
From:
Moshé Machover <[email protected]>
Moshé Machover <[email protected]>
Subject:
Re: Pro-Israel guard at the Guardian!
Re: Pro-Israel guard at the Guardian!
Date:
24 September 2015 11:38:27 BST
24 September 2015 11:38:27 BST
To:
Readers’ Editor <[email protected]>
Readers’ Editor <[email protected]>
Dear Chris Elliott,
It seems to me that
your online correction is itself in need of correction. The Golan Heights are
not merely “occupied” by Israel: unlike the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip,
but like the eastern part of Jerusalem, they have been illegally annexed
by it. This point is germane to the conflict that is the subject of the
article.
your online correction is itself in need of correction. The Golan Heights are
not merely “occupied” by Israel: unlike the occupied West Bank and Gaza Strip,
but like the eastern part of Jerusalem, they have been illegally annexed
by it. This point is germane to the conflict that is the subject of the
article.
Now you are
compounding the error by claiming that “[t]he annexed Golan Heights is
geographically bordering Syria”. This is absurd: would you say that the British
occupied part of Germany following the Second World War was “geographically
bordering Germany”?
compounding the error by claiming that “[t]he annexed Golan Heights is
geographically bordering Syria”. This is absurd: would you say that the British
occupied part of Germany following the Second World War was “geographically
bordering Germany”?
I look forward to
reading a forthright printed correction in your column.
reading a forthright printed correction in your column.
Best wishes,
Moshé Machover
Dear Moshé
Machover,
Machover,
If you look at the
terms and conditions of the readers’ editor’s role you will see we aim to
provide a substantive response within two or three working days. We did. There
wasn’t room for the correction this morning so I made the change last night and
we will probably run it tomorrow. I think the footnote fairly reflects how the
error occurred and the action taken. The annexed Golan Heights is
geographically bordering Syria although you are absolutely right to point out
that it is, in fact, part of Syria’s sovereign territory. The correction I have
drafted slightly amplifies that point but a correction is not meant to be an
essay and I can assure you, as someone who regularly has to address allegations
that the Guardian is an anti Isreal newspaper, nobody would accuse us of
thinking other than the Golan Heights is part of Syria.
terms and conditions of the readers’ editor’s role you will see we aim to
provide a substantive response within two or three working days. We did. There
wasn’t room for the correction this morning so I made the change last night and
we will probably run it tomorrow. I think the footnote fairly reflects how the
error occurred and the action taken. The annexed Golan Heights is
geographically bordering Syria although you are absolutely right to point out
that it is, in fact, part of Syria’s sovereign territory. The correction I have
drafted slightly amplifies that point but a correction is not meant to be an
essay and I can assure you, as someone who regularly has to address allegations
that the Guardian is an anti Isreal newspaper, nobody would accuse us of
thinking other than the Golan Heights is part of Syria.
Best wishes
Chris Elliott
_______________________________
[Sent on 23
September]
September]
Hi,
Yesterday morning I
emailed the factual correction pasted below to <[email protected]>.
The Guardian has not seen fit to publish this as a letter. Nor has it published
a correction in its Corrections and Clarifications column.
emailed the factual correction pasted below to <[email protected]>.
The Guardian has not seen fit to publish this as a letter. Nor has it published
a correction in its Corrections and Clarifications column.
Please draw your own
conclusions.
conclusions.
M Machover
___________________________________
[Sent on 22
September]
September]
In your report from
Jerusalem (Israel and Russia discuss Syrian civil war, 22 September) you
mistakenly refer to the Golan Heights as “bordering Syria”. The Golan
Heights do not “border” Syria: they are part of Syria, occupied by Israel since
1967. Israel’s annexation of that territory is illegal and not
recognized internationally.
Jerusalem (Israel and Russia discuss Syrian civil war, 22 September) you
mistakenly refer to the Golan Heights as “bordering Syria”. The Golan
Heights do not “border” Syria: they are part of Syria, occupied by Israel since
1967. Israel’s annexation of that territory is illegal and not
recognized internationally.
Sincerely,
Professor emeritus
Moshé Machover
Moshé Machover
Posted in Blog
