Yesterday, I wrote a critical post about the N.Y. Times editorial page’s “coverage” of Gaza noting that no columns had been written that were critical of the Israeli offensive (David Grossman’s was mildly so) and that no Arabs or Palestinians had been allowed to weigh in on the debate. Little did I know that today’s edition completely rectified those inadequacies. I noted yesterday that Nicholas Kristof wrote a piece about Gaza. Add to that Rashid Khalidi and Gideon Lichfield. All were excellent and highly critical of Israeli policy.
Finally, there has been enough innocent blood shed for the Times to understand that Israel’s invasion is becoming a disaster. And that the longer it continues the worse the catastrophe will become for Gaza, for Israel, for the region, and for U.S. interests in the region.
You know you’ve struck a chord when the Israel lobby complains as Abe Foxman does in the letters to the editor section.
Jerome Slater too has noticed the Times’ change of heart:
It’s almost beginning to look like the Times has experienced an epiphany. Not only is there increasingly skeptical coverage from its news reporters, including some who until now have been largely uncritical of Israel, but look at today’s amazing Op-Ed page: three columns that are highly critical of Israel, including one by Rashid Khalidi! In fact, the online edition has an additional column by Roger Cohen, who writes: “I have never previously felt so despondent about Israel, so shamed by its actions….”
I’m also noticing the hasbara type commenters have retreated from this blog. Either they’ve found bigger fish to fry or they too have become conflicted enough about what’s going on that they no longer have the moral confidence in Israel’s position that they once did.