 | By Stephen Pollard
March 19, 2010 | Share |
Hardly a surprise that my Guardian article has led to the usual stuff on the comments section.
But what's always so frustrating with this type of thing - but again, not a surprise - is that the angriest commenters rarely read what the piece
says or, perhaps still more important, what it does not.
I am accused of defending the settlements and Israeli building in East Jerusalem. Where though? You will not find a word of that from me, anywhere, in any piece, ever. Because I don't defend them. I think the settlements are wrong morally, politically and practically, and I would to like to see some form of international protectorate over Jerusalem.
And I've written that many times.
But the piece wasn't a vehicle for me to spout such views; it was a piece in which I offer my views over the context of this crisis, and what lies behind it.
Still, I never expected anything else from the anti-Zionists, anti-Israeli brigade or whatever they choose to call themselves.
Jonathan Hoffman
19 March, 2010 - 14:05
Rate this:
CiFWatch.com documents innumerable examples of this. As have I:
http://www.zionismontheweb.org/CommentIsFree_ParliamentASCttee_July08.pd...
"anti-Zionists, anti-Israeli brigade or whatever they choose to call themselves."
Very diplomatic - a somewhat murkier word is appropriate for many of the CIF regulars.