Extraordinary


By Jenni Frazer
April 25, 2012
Share

The Guardian's letters page and its adjunct Corrections column is a constant source of fascination. This week it excelled itself with a letter from Ben (I am not an antisemite) White, letters attacking the Globe Theatre for not withdrawing its invitation to Habima to perform in London, a correction for having traduced the JC over a BNP blog, and this little gem:
"The caption on a photograph featuring passengers on a tram in Jerusalem observing a two-minute silence for Yom Hashoah, a day of remembrance for the six million Jews who died in the Holocaust, wrongly referred to the city as the Israeli capital. The Guardian style guide states: 'Jerusalem is not the capital of Israel; Tel Aviv is.'"
Well. Where to start? With one hand the Guardian giveth, with the other it taketh away. It carefully cloaks itself in we-love-the-Jews-hood by running the Yom Hashoah photograph in the first place. Even the Guardian couldn't find anything snarky to say in the caption.
But wait! Yes, it had made a mistake according to the paper's style guide. It is the paper's style guide, you see, which carelessly runs roughshod across international norms of sovereignty and a country's right of self-determination. No matter that Israelis believe Jerusalem to be their capital; the Guardian style guide trumps that belief, as simply wrong.
No ifs, buts, qualifications; the Guardian knows best. Here is The Times on the same issue: "Jerusalem must not be used as a metonym or variant for Israel. It is not internationally recognised as the Israeli capital, and its status is one of the central controversies in the Middle East." That's a reasonable and sane approach.
Sad conclusion: the Guardian has lost the plot.

COMMENTS

Real Real Zionist

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 11:37

Rate this:

-1 points

If the French started to believe that Beijing was their capital would it be unreasonable of someone to point out that they were wrong ?

The problem is that when Israelis think and say " Jerusalem is our capital" everyone knows they mean the whole of an indivisible unshared Jerusalem and that is as equally and obviously wrong as saying that Beijing is the capital of France.

If it was made clear that what was meant was that the part of Jerusalem that was legitimately and unarguably part of Israel has been adopted as the Israeli capital,the whole world ( including,I daresay,The Guardian) would say "ok fine ".

It is this unshakeable sense and declaration of entitlement that gives the lie to many Israeli declarations that they favour two states for two people living in harmony together. It is nonsense to say what you favour and at the same time declare opposition to the circumstances that would make it possible.


Chris Tucker (not verified)

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 12:12

Rate this:

-1 points

Except that the Guardian clarification was prompted by information supplied by the Jewish Chronicle Editor, that doesn't seem to square with the facts.

This is all trivial stuff given that the Editor includes among the select few bloggers he is willing to host someone that he knows to be a proven cohort of the EDL.


zaheerayin

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 12:28

Rate this:

-1 points

Is the JC being Ahavaed?


Mary in Brighton

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 12:56

Rate this:

-1 points

lol


Jon.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 13:55

Rate this:

-1 points

I don't see what Ben White in the letters page and a caption on the capital of Israel have to do with each other?

I noticed they have also published letters by this gentleman. does this win them plus points?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/dec/23/israelandthepalestinians


Advis3r

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:12

Rate this:

0 points

Jenni welcome to the real world of Israel hatred - ably assisted by the bloggers you allow to propagate that hatred unimpeded on this website.

The real mistake in the Guardian style guide is that it says Tel Aviv is Israel's capital - really?

It seems only Israel of all the countries in the UN is not permitted to declare which city is its capital.

RRZ is once again totally wrong before 1967 and the liberation of the eastern suburbs of Jerusalem none of the major countries recognised Jerusalem as being Israel's capital either. So his proposal is dead in the water.

Perhaps RRZ can find an article written in the Guardian before 1967 acknowledging that Jerusalem was Israel's capital - I am far from optimistic.


Mary in Brighton

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:13

Rate this:

-1 points

Is Jonathan trying to re brand himself as the great moderate? Must be election time already.


Jon.

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 14:56

Rate this:

-1 points

Not trying to be flippant about it. Is Ms. Frazer suggesting that the Guardian publishing a letter by Ben White and their style guide are two examples of the same problem?


Antoine Clarke

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 15:15

Rate this:

1 point

"If the French started to believe that Beijing was their capital"

Could the Real Deal Zionist name a single French person, dead or alive, who has ever claimed that Beijing was the capital of France?

The claim by Israelis that Jerusalem is their capital does not strike me as anywhere in that league. Yes, the claim is disputed by Palestinians, but that is a difference of political and legal opinion, not one of geographical fact.

If Real Deal Zionist had said that some French might think Aachen (Aix-la-Chapelle) is the capital of France, he would have made a better point.


Real Real Zionist

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 15:41

Rate this:

-1 points

Antoine I said IF the French started to believe...... And it is very much a matter of geographical fact. Just because Beijing is a lot further away from France than East Jerusalem is from Israel that hardly makes a difference in this context.

If it is a difference of political and legal opinion it is a difference between Israel and the rest of the entire world.That really isn't any kind of a contest.

You perhaps should adopt the motto of your namesake Antoine St Just

" Today I have done badly but tomorrow I will do better"


Harvey

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 16:06

Rate this:

1 point

Prior to 1967 , Jordan had annexed the West Bank . There was no Palestinian state and East Jerusalem was not the capital as there was simply no Palestinian state . The nearest thing to a Palestinian capital was Amman .
During the 48 war of independence , the Arab league under Glubb Pasha captured the Jewish quarter of the Old City . Nearly 60 synagogues and community centres were either torched or desecrated by turning them into stables . Jewish Grave stones from the Mount of Olives were uprooted and used to for road ways through the old city .
The UN brokered agreement that Jews would still have limited access to the Kotel was never honoured .
Since its recapture and subsequent unification , all denominations have equal and inalienable right of worship as is the case throughout Israel .
Israel will not relinquish its inalienable sovereign right to Jerusalem . The Muslim world has 57 capitals , the Arabs 22 of those 57 . There has never been a Palestinian state . Why must it be just on their demand , that Jerusalem suddenly becomes the focal point when it never was before .
It matters not one iota what other states regard as the capital of Israel . That is for Israel to decide . It decided on Jerusalem which has been the hope and aspiration through the millennia . If Israel decides to relinquish east Jerusalem ( which I doubt ) as part of a peace agreement that will be for Israel to decide and no prior demand to change that will be acknowledged or accepted .


Real Real Zionist

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 16:23

Rate this:

-1 points

No two state solution then,just one big happy family between the river and the sea. Is that the official position of the four extremist raggle taggle gypsies ?


Jenni Frazer

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 16:31

Rate this:

2 points

It might be worth pointing out that there doesn't seem to be a single country which describes Tel Aviv as Israel's capital, whether or not they agree with Israeli claims to Jerusalem. Rather, they say that such a claim is disputed.
My point was to highlight the Guardian's dogmatism when it comes to Israel, citing its style guide as the last word. Perhaps that is too subtle for some commenters here to take on board.


Real Real Zionist

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 16:42

Rate this:

-1 points

Point taken. Style guides are by their very nature dogmatic. Interestingly the US State Dept refuses to say which city is Israel's capital, insisting that it is a matter of negotiation. So they presumably think that in the interim Israel doesn't have a capital.

What a mess.

Everyone knows what a solution would look like.

Why don't we JUST DO IT.


Mary in Brighton

Wed, 04/25/2012 - 16:45

Rate this:

-1 points

One state bad

Two states worse

No state good !!!


Advis3r

Thu, 04/26/2012 - 12:26

Rate this:

0 points

No Mary, heaven!


Mary in Brighton

Thu, 04/26/2012 - 16:41

Rate this:

-1 points

Advis3r, you haven't been converted to gentile dualism have you?


suzanna

Fri, 04/27/2012 - 09:18

Rate this:

-1 points

Why does the JC hate the Guardian so much?

Because it tells the truth?


Advis3r

Fri, 04/27/2012 - 11:25

Rate this:

0 points

I see having to issue an apology means you tell the truth.

It tells the truth as in: The Guardian has apologised to The Sun for a front page report on Tuesday which stated that the paper had accessed the medical records of the infant son of former prime minister Gordon Brown.
(15 July 2011 - Press gazette)

Or as in: The Guardian has apologised to News International after claiming on its front page today that a reporter from The Sun was sent to doorstep a barrister involved in the Leveson Inquiry. (23 November 2011 - Press Gazette)

Besides the CST The Guardian has apologised to Jacob Zuma, the South African President and leader of the African National Congress party, for an article that suggested he was "a rapist and guilty of corruption and bribery".

No wonder you support it.


suzanna

Fri, 04/27/2012 - 11:38

Rate this:

0 points

No, you tiresome little man (if indeed you are a man), issuing an apology means you made a mistake to which you then apologise for and correct.
Unlike the JC which libels and bad mouths all sorts of people - Raed Salah - for example.
Has the 'impartial' so called 'voice of the community' retracted any of its offensive and untrue statements? I doubt it.

By the way, it's difficult to 'support' a newspaper (unless owning shares in it I suppose). You can support a football team, or a netball team.

And the two examples you dragged up refer to News International! Have you any idea what News International is or the corrosive effect it has had on democracy and the law?


Advis3r

Fri, 04/27/2012 - 13:51

Rate this:

0 points

I am pleased you think I am tiresome. Your problem is you can dish out criticism but can't take it.

The Guardian have issued so many apologies that their claim to be a quality newspaper is a joke - much like you.

You are supporting the paper by claiming it tells the truth - when it comes to Israel that is a complete stretch - you know like saying Tel Aviv is Israel's capital city.

Unfortunately you find the truth tiresome - says much about you.

I did not know that Jacob Zuma had anything to do with News International?

Whatever skullduggery news International may have done does not give the Guardian the right to tell lies about it does it - or are you one of those people who believe that telling lies is justified when it supports your view? You know much like Hamas and the PA.


suzanna

Fri, 04/27/2012 - 14:00

Rate this:

0 points

Whatever.

Plenty of people read the Guardian and trust it.

Because the judeofascists don't like the fact that the Guardian promotes justice for the Palestinians they do what they always do; SCREAM antisemite.


Advis3r

Fri, 04/27/2012 - 14:11

Rate this:

0 points

Usual claptrap to try and stifle debate - did I accuse the Guardian of anti-Semitism? You see you utter a lie to support the insupportable.

No I pointed out that its claims to be a quality paper are at best suspect especially because of its obsession with Israel and its predeliction to libel the country at every opportunity. How a photograph about Israelis commemorating Holocaust Memorial Day in Jerusalem could become so contentious is a case in point.

You are not so much pro-Palestinian as anti-Israel, when you understand and admit that you will be well on the way to recovery.


Real Real Zionist

Fri, 04/27/2012 - 15:13

Rate this:

0 points

Suzanna do you really think there is any point in bickering with the oaf ?


Advis3r

Mon, 04/30/2012 - 15:18

Rate this:

0 points

Thanks for the intervention thankfully we probably shan't be hearing from that particular bigot again soon - although I must admit until she started posting here I never knew Neanderthals could read and write.


suzanna

Mon, 04/30/2012 - 15:23

Rate this:

0 points

Ignore him and he will go away.


Advis3r

Mon, 04/30/2012 - 16:14

Rate this:

0 points

Wishful thinking, bigot.

POST A COMMENT

You must be logged in to post a comment.

LATEST COMMENTS