Complaints against an advertisement for travel to Palestine were upheld by the British Advertising Standards Authority. The authority in a ruling released Wednesday said that the Travel Palestine ad should not be published again as it is currently constituted.
All sides agree that a beating last month left a Jewish U.S. Army trainee, Private Michael Handman, with facial wounds, severe oral injuries and a concussion. What's in dispute is whether the assault -- at the base in Fort Benning, Ga. -- was carried out by multiple attackers, and if it was the product of an anti-Semitic campaign waged by Handman's superiors.
Last October, a man called with a complaint. Before I could ask what was the matter, he launched into a tirade about a biased and
inaccurate article. He said he couldn't believe a serious newspaper would print such lies. He was so angry, he was this close to canceling his subscription.
I wasn't sure which article he was referring to, so I gently asked him to be more specific. He went on to describe a piece I had absolutely no memory of.
"Are you sure you read this in The Jewish Journal?"
"The Journal?" he said. "No! This was in The Los Angeles Times."
"The Times?" I said. "So why are you calling me?"
"Because they won't pick up the phone!"
The Arab and Iranian complaint that they are threatened and victimized by the Zionists is fascinatingly twisted. In fact, they do themselves considerable damage through their own anti-Semitism. Two recent examples come to mind.
A curious thing happened in the pages of The Jewish Journal the week of Nov. 20. During a period when a host of issues of major importance to the American Jewish community were occuring that commanded front page attention elsewhere, The Journal chose to devote the cover story and an editorial in the Nov. 20 issue to the complaints of a disgruntled documentary director and his co-writer against Moriah Films of the Simon Wiesenthal Center. In spite of The Journal's claims that it was not "picking on the Wiesenthal Center," one wonders what the editorial staff's true motives were in giving an inordinate amount of space to the attempt by these individuals to politicize what was for all intents and purposes a dispute over the best creative approach to a film about Israel's first 50 years.