Don’t get me wrong. He NYT IS the newspaper of record so it’s great that they’ve outed Giuliani’s neocon pro-Israel stack of Mideast policy advisers including Daniel Pipes and Norman “WWIV” Podhoretz. It’s a great story. But why didn’t they note that Ken Silverstein at Harper’s has been reporting the story for months (as have I, but Ken was there first)? In fact, Ken’s first story came out on August 27th in which he reported that Giuliani’s team of advisers included Podhoretz, Martin Kramer and Charles Hill. He also published a subsequent story about Pipes joining the team and another about Pipes’ support for the war crimes notion of razing entire Palestinian villages in retaliation for attacks on Israel. In other words, he was all over this story before it was a gleam in the NYT’s eye.
I’m a former academic and I was trained if you didn’t credit your sources you were just plain no good. Maybe journalism is different. I’m not sure why it should be but maybe it is. But I do believe in setting the record straight and Ken should get the credit even if Marc Santora and Michael Cooper aren’t willing to give it to him. [UPDATE: Michael Cooper has written saying that Marc Santora began researching this story in the summer and did not know about Ken’s work. That’s an honest reply. However, if I could find Ken’s work by doing a Google search on Daniel Pipes it seems to me that a crack NYT journalist should’ve been able to do so as well. I’m not saying this to be snarky. I just think that given the importance that attaches to NYT reportage that other journalists who are the first to report a story deserve credit or acknowledgement for that when the NYT follows with a later story.]
Another great quotation from Ken’s reporting is this characterization of the overall Mideast policy group:
I asked Augustus Richard Norton of Boston University, an expert adviser to the Iraq Study Group, for his take on Giuliani’s crew. He dubbed the group “AIPAC’s Dream Team.”
We shouldn’t let that phrase die. It should attach to Giuliani like Elmer’s glue every time any of us mention him.
By the way, one thing the Times story missed out on completely, which is very important, is that Giuliani’s rejection of the notion of creating an independent Palestinian state flies in the face of bipartisan consensus U.S. policy going back decades. In other words, Giuliani is a radical troglodyte when it comes to his views on Israel. I guess you can’t quite say that in the august NYT–but I just did.
“Giuliani’s neocon pro-Israel stack of Mideast policy advisers”
I’ve been talking about it for years, but then I don’t work for the NYTimes, nor do I blog.
I find it much more important, as I noted on your blog earlier, that he surrounds [at least did surround] himself with fanatical right-wing pro-Israel ideologues who may have had connection to the murder of Prime Minister Rabin, at the very least they helped to create the climate that led to that murder. Beyond any speculation these people provided ‘justification’ for the killing of Rabin.
I wish I could get to Wayne Barrett. Seems to me this is an excellent story about Mr. Law and Order. Many people still remember and highly regard Prime Minister Rabin.
ellen
…on the other hand, maybe the connection shouldn’t get out.
It would only raise Guiliani’s stature among some people.
I wonder if Giuliani really has any covictions about peace in the Middle East at all, but rather is trying to shore up his right flank with right wing Jews and Evangelicals, both of which groups have problems with his domestic social positions. Although I note that he’s back pedalling there too. Now he supports a constitutional amendment to outlaw same sex marriage. Watch for him to be reborn this year and find the “truth” about a woman’s right to choose what happens to her body.
It certainly WOULD raise his stature & that’s why he’s working with them in the first place. He wants to lock up the fatcat grey-haired Jewish vote AND money–all the AIPAC leadership & Abe Foxman types.
Golem:
“Convictions”? Does any politician have a conviction aside from that they should be elected?
{exception Kucinich}
I do agree that he is playing to the Right-wing. I also think G. would be *much* worse than Bush, because he (G.) is evil, and his evil is not blended/diluted with things like religious fundamentalism.
I also predict, that regardless of where she is in the polls, America will not elect a woman, no more than they will elect an African-American.
ellen
Silverstein and Santora should look into this: the Giuliani campaign has never announced Daniel Pipes as an adviser. It has announced a slew of advisers in press releases on the JoinRudy2008 website, but you won’t find Pipes there. Pipes may have endorsed Rudy, but Rudy’s campaign has yet to endorse Pipes. Interesting…