The fallout from Hurricane Herzl (see my 22 & 23/9/08 posts, Storms Forecast & Hurricane Herzl) continues.
To begin with, The Australian's Zionist schadenfreude junkies just had to get in on the act:
"The Sydney Morning Herald editorialises on Monday that the domination of the Jewish majority in Israel is problematic: 'Tzipi Livni's party remains wedded to the problematic idea that the Jewish majority must always dominate Israel (but) they are at least willing to cede land to the Palestinians in order to secure a Jewish state'.
"A new day dawns and a new editorial line is adopted at the SMH on Tuesday: 'In our editorial yesterday, the Herald did not intend to imply that Israel's Jewish majority is in any way 'problematic' in itself. It is those who refuse to recognise Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state, such as Hezbollah and Hamas, who are problematic by dealing themselves out of a constructive peace process'." (Cut & Paste, 24/9/08)
On the same day, the Herald published this letter:
"Vic Alhadeff (Letters, September 23) is wrong to say that non-Jewish minorities have been treated as free and equal citizens since Israel was established. For a start, the majority population in Israel in 1948 were Arab Palestinians. When the war started, many were forced off their land at the point of a gun. Since then, many Christian Palestinians in particular have emigrated because they have been discriminated against by Israeli governments in terms of housing, land ownership and job opportunities." Alexander Lane, Thornleigh
And today, this:
"I object strongly to the editorial statement that 'Israel's legitimacy as a Jewish state is beyond question' (Time for Israel to decide, September 23). By putting the issue beyond question, is the Herald trying to ban freedom of thought? Or only of speech? I claim the right to question the legitimacy of the Jewish state in Palestine. The statement also denies reality. It assumes the land is uncontested. It is contested. It may be that the Palestinians have to give up contesting it, but that will be because they don't have any choice." Elizabeth Andrews, Maroubra
Update, 26/9/08: The Australian has an opinion piece by Kenan Malik titled How the West was lost for free speech: Freedom of expression is not just an important liberty but its foundation. Here's an extract: "Today, all it takes for a publisher to run for cover is a letter from an outraged academic. US publisher Random House recently torpedoed the publication of a novel... for fear of setting off another Rushdie affair." Rejig this for Hurricane Herzl and you get: 'Today, all it takes for an editor to run for cover is a phone call(s) from an outraged Israel lobbyist(s). On Tuesday, 23 September, an Australian newspaper, the Sydney Morning Herald, rewrote its editorial of the day to placate an angry Israel lobby'.