{"id":1290,"date":"2004-09-06T00:15:31","date_gmt":"2004-09-06T07:15:31","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"2004-09-06T00:15:31","modified_gmt":"2004-09-06T07:15:31","slug":"moore-makes-nyt-look-better","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/2004\/09\/06\/moore-makes-nyt-look-better\/","title":{"rendered":"Moore Makes NYT Look Better"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>The Forward of August 27 has an interesting pairing of op-ed pieces.  In <a href=\"http:\/\/www.forward.com\/main\/article.php?ref=200408251008\">the first<\/a>, the Jewish weekly expresses its dismay re the Bush administration&#8217;s approval of a new Israel settlement construction project.  The approval comes at a time when Israel&#8217;s attorney general is suggesting it should &#8220;recognize the applicability in the territories of the Fourth Geneva Convention, the 1949 treaty on which the world court relied to declare the fence and the settlements illegal.&#8221;<\/p>\n<p>For 37 years, &#8220;Israel has rejected the treaty as inapplicable to the territories, and Washington, while disagreeing, has looked the other way. Successive administrations have tut-tutted about &#8216;obstacles to peace,&#8217; but every president has guaranteed Israel the running room to do what it felt it must.&#8221;  Now, &#8220;while Israelis search desperately for a way to disentangle themselves from their neighbors, Washington is offering to assist in deepening the quagmire.&#8221;   <\/p>\n<p>If The Forward really thinks a sick joke has gone on long enough, the <a href=\"http:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/comments.php?id=P1268_0_1_0_C\n\">second piece<\/a>, John Kerry&#8217;s pledge of &#8220;unwavering support,&#8221; should make it very uneasy.  <\/p>\n<p>Ha&#8217;aretz columnists <a href=\"http:\/\/www.haaretz.com\/hasen\/spages\/470422.html\">Gideon Levy <\/a> and <a href=\"http:\/\/www.haaretz.com\/hasen\/spages\/469413.html\">Meron  Benvenisti <\/a>also think that the Attorney General Mazuz&#8217;s recommendation re recognizing the applicabilty of the Geneva Convention is significant.  While it apparently doesn&#8217;t agree, the <a href=\"http:\/\/www.iht.com\/bin\/print.php?file=535523.html\">New York Times <\/a>does lament Bush&#8217;s &#8220;support for a major expansion of Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank.&#8221; And in this context it offers <a href=\"http:\/\/www.nytimes.com\/2004\/09\/02\/opinion\/02thu1.html?ei=5006&#038;en=99f463099e884fa7&#038;ex=1094788800&#038;partner=ALTAVISTA1&#038;pagewanted=print&#038;position=\">acceptance speech advice<\/a>, &#8220;If Mr. Bush is going to speak seriously about terrorism tonight, he also needs to talk about Israel.&#8221;  But again, what about &#8220;Mr. Kerry?&#8221;<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/www.usatoday.com\/printedition\/news\/20040902\/oplede02.art.htm\">Michael Moore<\/a> doesn&#8217;t mention Israel in his USA Today acceptance speech advice offering, &#8220;it&#8217;s show time&#8221; so let&#8217;s gush over the Bush daughters for five paragraphs.  Linda Stasi has a <a href=\"http:\/\/www.nypost.com\/commentary\/29608.htm\">strong protest piece<\/a> in the New York Post, but I don&#8217;t think she realizes just how much of <a href=\"http:\/\/news.independent.co.uk\/world\/americas\/story.jsp?story=558350\">a burden <\/a>Moore has become. It&#8217;s not surprising that <a href=\"http:\/\/news.independent.co.uk\/world\/americas\/story.jsp?story=558354\">Bush has surged<\/a> to a double digit lead.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The Forward of August 27 has an interesting pairing of op-ed pieces. In the first, the Jewish weekly expresses its dismay re the Bush administration&#8217;s approval of a new Israel settlement construction project. The approval comes at a time when Israel&#8217;s attorney general is suggesting it should &#8220;recognize the applicability in the territories of the [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":30,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_seopress_robots_primary_cat":"","_seopress_titles_title":"","_seopress_titles_desc":"","_seopress_robots_index":"","_seopress_analysis_target_kw":"","_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_social_image_id":0,"_social_image_url":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[676],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-1290","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","tag-antiwar-movement"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"meta_box":{"disable_donate_message":"","custom_donate_message":"","_social_image_id":false,"subtitle":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1290","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/30"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1290"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1290\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1290"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1290"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1290"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.antiwar.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=1290"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}