We pay for this poison

By Stephen Pollard
January 26, 2009

The London Review of Books, the house journal of a certain kind of intellectual, has long indulged in a particularly nasty form of anti-Israel propaganda - paid for by us, the taxpayer (it receives a £20,000 subsidy from the Arts Council).

The latest issue is even worse than I expected. The main piece is headlined:

Israel's lies

And then, to put that into 'context', it's followed by commentary from Tariq Ali, David Bromwich, Alastair Crooke, Conor Gearty, Eric Hobsbawm, R.W. Johnson, Rashid Khalidi, Yitzhak Laor, Yonatan Mendel, John Mearsheimer, Ilan Pappe, Gabriel Piterberg, Jacqueline Rose, Eliot Weinberger and Michael Wood.

Every single piece - every one of the fifteeen commentaries - is pure Israel-bashing. Nowhere is there even the most basic attempt to explain Israel's position. Pure poison - poison paid for by you and me.



Mon, 01/26/2009 - 19:37

Rate this:

0 points

Ilan Pappe, the holder of the Baron von Munchausen Chair of History at whatever university he is at...

Adam Myers

Tue, 01/27/2009 - 15:26

Rate this:

0 points

This is not unusual for them, although it just illustrates the pernicious effect of state funding of the 'arts'.

I suppose the only consolation is that its only read by a self-selecting clique of the uber left so they only talking to themselves.

Jonathan Hoffman

Tue, 01/27/2009 - 22:21

Rate this:

0 points

I did a campaign about the Barbican Arts Centre last May. They also get Arts Council money. There has been no Israeli Film Festival for 18 years but there have been four Palestinian Film Festivals in four years. And the ‘Homeland Lost’ photographic exhibition they had last year contained text which falsely demonised Israel.

Maybe Arts Council funding is conditional on being anti-Israel.

simon sandberg

Fri, 11/19/2010 - 19:19

Rate this:

0 points

My goodness you don't get much of an elevated debate on these pages do you? Stephen Pollard should be ashamed of himself ranting on about 'poison'. Far better to address the points made and seek to rebut them than to assert that these pieces are 'propaganda'. Seligman in the lead essay takes issue with reporting of the Gaza war and makes a number of assertions. If he's wrong then it's open to Mr. Pollard or anyone else to take issue. But name calling is vacuous and pretty silly especially when Prof Seligman is a former national director of the American Jewish Congress and of the Synagogue Council of America.


You must be logged in to post a comment.