Tikun Olam-תיקון עולם: Make the World a Better Place

Pages

• Home
• Photo Gallery
• Advertising
• Comment Rules
• Subscribe to Posts (per post)
• Tikun Olam Store
• Donate
• Subscribe (daily digest)
• Contact
• About
• Monthly archives
• Terms of Use

11 Responses to “JTA Editor Accuses Tikun Olam of Lying”

1. Zona says:

   November 21, 2007 at 8:26 AM

   Dick – You shouldn’t have breached Eden’s trust like that. How are others supposed to trust you won’t make the same mistake with them? This doesn’t let JTA off the hook for its errors, but it doesn’t make you look good either.

   Reply
2. Sol Salbe says:

   November 21, 2007 at 11:54 AM

   Richard,
   Just to set the record straight. The statement you quote from the Dan Goldberg;s report is 100 per cent correct. Michael Danby is the only MP to identify himself/herself as Jewish. Ms Roxon, while proud of her heritage, has never identified herself as Jewish. I also think that Goldberg did all his own writing. The only mistake he made was to take his erstwhile employers in the Australian Jewish News’ report about Roxon for good coin. Personally I do not think it is worth a”we were wrong” correction, unless Ms Roxon demands it. Whether she outed herself as of having a Jewish heritage two weeks ago or at least six years ago is not a major issue.

   Sol

   Reply
3. David says:

   November 21, 2007 at 9:45 PM

   I can’t believe JTA has still not apologized to Archbishop Tutu and their readers. The arrogance of power, I suppose. Keep the pressure on them, Richard.

   BTW, don’t forget Ron Kampeas’s interview with Mearsheimer and Walt where he wonders whether they were “on drugs.”
   http://www.jewishreview.org/node/249

   Reply
4. Richard Silverstein says:

   November 21, 2007 at 10:44 PM

   The statement you quote from the Dan Goldberg;s report is 100 per cent correct.

   I stand corrected. I’ve edited the text to reflect your correction.

   But it would’ve been nice for Goldberg to have known that Roxon was Jewish since if you knew many other Australians probably knew as well. But it’s certainly nowhere as major an journalistic issue as the other ones I raised above.

   Reply
5. Richard Silverstein says:

   November 21, 2007 at 11:22 PM

   David: To readers interested in following a debate here on the Ron Kampeas story, check out the comment thread for this post. I’m only sorry Kampeas didn’t reply to my own comment addressing his.

   Reply
6. Richard Silverstein says:

   November 22, 2007 at 12:03 AM

   Dick – You shouldn’t have breached Eden’s trust like that. How are others supposed to trust you won’t make the same mistake with them?

   Are you in the habit of addressing people you don’t know in demeaning terms? You should be happy you have concealed your own name & used a fake e mail address so I can’t mangle your own first name.

   If quoting Ami Eden in a blog post here is the worst error I ever make in this blog then I’ll still be able to sleep at night. People who trust me will go on doing so. And people like Ami who don’t will continue not to. Anyway, what really ticks Ami off is not so much the breach of journalistic etiquette as the severity of my criticisms of JTA. Focussing obsessively on quoting him here is a way to attempt to demean the value of my critique of the agency’s journalism. You’ll notice that so far he has not commented here to challenge the content of my claims. Nor did he ever do so in any of his e mails despite my repeated request that he do so.

   I note that even today Ami’s tut-tutting over this:

   Thanks for repaying my trust in man.

   I quoted four lines from his e mail & thereby destroyed his ability ever to trust his fellow man again. I’m humbled by the power he’s granted me.

   Reply
7. Zona says:

   November 22, 2007 at 8:45 AM

   Richard – Apologies for using the informal version of your name. Honest mistake and no insult intended. I’ll let my comments stand for themselves. Like many humans you’re quick to forgive yourself and even quicker to attribute malicious intent to others.

   Reply
8. Richard Silverstein says:

   November 23, 2007 at 12:27 AM

   Yr apology is accepted. But what you don’t understand is how many times my first & last names have been distorted or mangled by commenters here for insulting effect. The form of my first name you used is but one of many ways in which people do this. To you this may appear being quick to attribute malicious intent. But in the context of wingnut comment behavior in this blog, I need to be clear about how I prefer to be addressed (& not addressed).

   You are perfectly right to take me to task for forgetting my commitment to Ami. It was a mistake. But which is worse: quoting four rather innocuous lines of an e mail or allowing Mort Klein to smear Desmond Tutu as an anti-Semite & not apologizing or properly correcting the mistake & then suggesting that I was a liar and “smeared” JTA because I only noted what was already clear to almost everyone (except JTA)–that they hadn’t done the decent thing?

   Reply
9. Zona says:

   November 23, 2007 at 3:42 AM

   The latter is worse.

   Reply
10. Warren says:

    November 23, 2007 at 5:35 PM

    Richard,

    Keep fighting the good fight. Your screechy bonehead opponents occupy a different
    moral universe than you do. I think some of these groups who need to lambast you feel more frantic and verklempt than they used to and this probably augments their hysterical denunciations. They probably know deep down their propaganda is growing stale and the tide of public opinion is slowly but surely shifting when it comes to foreign policy attitudes, etc. (though not, alas, the disposition of our power elites), and they’re doing what they can to keep our Warfare State with its little Middle Eastern Sparta tag-along churning away. I’ll chuck you in with Jimmy Carter as a somewhat beseiged (but pleasingly stoical) good guy.

    Warren

    Reply
11. Zona says:

    November 25, 2007 at 4:25 PM

    Warren,

    Your commentary would make more sense if I had written ‘the former’ above instead of ‘the latter’, yes?

    Reply