Some facts appear to be more sacred than others at the Guardian

Ros

Yes, I noticed this too and posted on CiF. And what is their point in omitting the Israelis? You have to wonder about the Guardian. It's almost becoming a parody. Not 'almost.' It is a parody.

Chris

They ARE in the list on the Guardian website.

Original Tony

This is disgusting! Has anyone asked the editor to comment?

david (London)

When I looked at the data the names seemed to be there - they must have been added back in

Thomas

Well Chris, I'd suggest they've been added later then. I didn't see them when I checked a little earlier. Nor did all the other people who've commented at the bottom of the page.

Brad Brzezinski

I emailed Simon Rogers and he replied there had been an error in porting the data and it was being fixed. I give him the benefit of the doubt.

Biodegradable

The original list with the names deleted is here:
http://www.hurryupharry.org/2009/10/09/who-is-missing-from-this-list/

wonderer

The Guardian must have seen it was a fair cop and posted a correction.

Mark

Would`nt we of been more surprised if the Guardian DID include Jewish Israeli names in their prize list?

YA

When you enter room you usually notice where the plinth is, right? Guardian's CIF is useful site, to test the depth of s@@t. Yes it becomes deeper with each passing year.. But there are good signs, too. It also becomes more and more "multicultural", marginal, and unintelligible. Hope its fate in journalism will be like Galloway's "Respect"'s in politics.

John Edwards

As Simon Rogers has pointed out it is untrue to claim that only the three Israeli names were omitted.

The original list also left out John Raleigh Mott, the Quakers and the League of Red Cross Societies.

You should have checked this against the Nobel prize list before posting your claims about the Guardian. I hope Melanie you will now publish a retraction.

Biodegradable

John Edwards,

I don't see that Melanie needs to retract anything.

Perhaps you should ask The Guardian to explain why those names were removed, and then restored to the list.

Personally I don't need an explanation from The Guardian, I know only too well why they did it.

Steve

So what is common about these winners? Absolutely nothing. They aren't from the same countries and aren't of the same type of status.

The chances that three Israeli Prime Ministers were left out is infinitesimal from this list.

No apology needed - except from the Guardian

Biodegradable

They also cropped out Elie Wiesel - 1986

Biodegradable

I stand corrected Elie Wiesel is on the list under "USA". The Guardian must have just searched for occurrences of "Israel" and not "Jew".

Pot Head

“Very few leaders if at all were able to change the mood of the entire world in such a short while with such a profound impact. You provided the entire humanity with fresh hope, with intellectual determination, and a feeling that there is a lord in heaven and believers on earth.”

Shimon Peres on Obama wining The Nobel Peace Prize.

Brian Moshe

This obscene and unearned award to Obama merely reduces the credibility of an already debased Prize.

If he has an ounce of decency he will decline it 'this time'.

Meanwhile the KGB-style removal of the names of three/four Jewish Prize winners from the Guardian's original list further accelerates the free-falling credibility and reputation of a once great newspaper.

John Edwards

The Guardian editor has explained how the error happened and it was corrected immediately.

The allegation made is that someone working at the Guardian deliberately falsified the list to exclude the three Israeli names.

Again as the Guardian editor has pointed there were more than three names omitted from the list. The omissions also included the Quakers and the Red Cross.

Melanie's allegation is therefore false and should be withdrawn.

Furthermore, before making this post she could easily have checked the original Guardian list against the complete Nobel Prize list or asked the Guardian for an explanation.

Elementary fact checking!

John Edwards

One further point, I notice that Melanie puts Palestine in inverted commas with reference to Yasser Arafat. Presumably then the Guardian is also at fault for putting Tibet next to that other exiled leader and prize winner - the Dalai Lama.

John Edwards

I don't think Barack Obama has yet done anything to deserve the Nobel Peace Prize

Although he would if he actually achieved a two state settlement of the Israel/Palestine conflict.

Sam ARMSTRONG

Just testing to see if anyone cared I suppose. They obviously found out that people DO care immensely, angrily, of course... viewed correctly, this is a score.

Lupus Lungfish

I'm with you on this one Melanie.

Gil

How can anyone think that this wasn't the Guardian putting the boot into Israel (again...) and call themselves unbiased. If the three other organisations mentioned were indeed left out of the list then that was merely part of the inevitable alibi which the Guardian had prepared knowing full well that there 'error' would be spotted.

pete woodhouse

these are simon roger's posts at harry's place............."Hi
I’m afraid rather than conspiracy, we’re also just capable of making a mistake in complicated data entry (which affected a number where there were two or more winners). This has been rectified."............and...................." Joseph K, I really don’t know where to begin, but I’ll have a go.
The “source” document you refer to is the Google docs spreadsheet we set up as an expanded version of the summary on the page - so that you can download the full dataset.
The original from Nobelprize.org is just an HTML page which takes a lot of mangling to get into spreadsheet form.
The errors happened when we decided to put joint winners in two columns - which is why the country reference survived, but the name didn’t, ie you see “Israel” but not Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin. When the table first went up this lunchtime, it also missed out John Raleigh Mott, The Quakers and the League of Red Cross Societies. We assumed all the errors were at the top but unfortunately they weren’t.
This combined with an error on the page which meant that comments couldn’t be viewed on a Mac in Firefox - so I didn’t see the comments until, literally, the Harry’s place post went up. If I had, I would have picked it up much sooner.
Many apologies if you were offended, but it really wasn’t deliberate."

the question we must ask is what is the probability that half (i'm being generous here as 2 of the other 3 were not so much omitted as not repeated in the 2nd column) of the omissions were all israeli PMs when no other israeli's were omitted. i'm not a mathematician by any means but i would guess that it's in the millions to 1 (the chance of just the israelis being omitted is about 8333333:1), and compare that with the likelyhood of a member of the guardian's staff doing it deliberately. occam's razor anyone?

Straydingo

Chris,

Please stay in your box...as now it’s getting just plain embarrassing.

Biodegradable

Airbrushing Jews out of history is a daily occurrence at The Guardian. See my post here about their coverage of Ed Milliband's reunion with the last Milliband alive in Russia. The Guardian blithely reports that "Milibandâ™s grandfather Samuel left Poland and headed west. His father, the Marxist political theorist Ralph Miliband, was born in Belgium but fled to Britain. Sofia Milibandâ™s family, meanwhile, set off in the other direction and settled in Moscow, where she was born."

The Telegraph gives a much more complete version of the Milliband family's diaspora.

The chance discovery will help him and his brother David, the foreign secretary, learn more about their late fatherâ™s Polish Jewish side of the family.

Samuel, the brothersâ™ grandfather, and Ralph, their father, fled to England at the start of the Second World War but many other family members were stranded in Nazi-occupied Poland.

[...]

Mrs Miliband, explained how she had told the minister how two men thought to be Mr Milibandâ™s great uncles committed suicide in order to escape the Nazi concentration camps, while a third was killed during the Nazi invasion of Poland. One of the men, Mikheil, killed himself by swallowing a dose of poison while boarding a train he learned was bound for Auschwitz or Dachau. A second relative, Osip, gassed himself and his wife using the kitchen stove, and a third relative, Stefan, was killed by German troops.

Chuck

Neither 0bama nor the omitted Israelis are important. The Nobel Peace Prize has debased itself to the point where it actually dishonorable to win it. Does anyone want to do the math and figure out the average number of innocent people killed by winners of the prize?

Simon Wolfendale, Israel

Well said John Edwards.

Yet again the mouth, or typing digits, of Phillips go into action before the space where here brain would be.

Nick

Chuck, precisely. Look at Henry Kissinger, for example.

seb

Many Guardian readers and journalists would have preferred the pariah state, Israel, to have been invaded rather than Afghanistan or Iraq, which have apparently always been models of progressive states. And guess what? Not a single one of these great thinkers is an anti-semite hiding his or her bigotry behind Mock Turtle tears over the plight of the Palestinians. Being reminded of fact that Israelis have won the Nobel Peace Prize probably causes the comrades to have rabid fits.

Arnie Sagnussen

Comment is Freely manipulated, it would appear.

Bobby

It is also interesting that the link in the article to download the data has a link that points to http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=t428ng6efkWu-fCkABi4YgQ

In which, out of all the cells in the entire spreadsheet, only the cell D95 (a cell containing the name of a country) is in a smaller font than the rest. Care to guess which country? Why Israel of course - must be yet another coincidence. Is this document one uploaded to google docs by the Guardian? If so, after all this, why is Israel in a smaller font? If it is not a doc owned by the Guardian it means that this list was compiled independantly before Simon's. If so, then Simon's excuse that the error was introduced when the winners were split into 2 columns is implausible since this google list is exactly the same form, same headings, punctuation etc as SImon's yet it doesn't have the errors.

Mr Melrose

The only trouble with Maggie was that she didn't utterly crush the socialists when she had the chance. Oh, and close down the Gyuardeon and hang the editor for treason. So thats the last word on that then.

Now past the moderator I pose the question - just read Mel's thougts on the Tories (see bottom right articles). She is quite upset that Dave is going to be soft on Gays Immigrants and Muslims (GIM). Are GIM the major threat or have the bankers got anything to do with our present lot?

Laura J

John Edwards: "Elementary fact checking!" eh?

It was the Guardian that got the facts wrong.

We have what its editor claims is an explanation, but if it prints factually incorrect material, that's not anyone's fault but its own. It was only rectified because Mel pointed it out.

If you bothered to do some elementary fact-checking yourself, John Edwards, you'd know that 'Palestine' goes in inverted commas because there is no such place.

They are Palestinian territories.

patricia

Ah yes Yitzak Rabin

A name we ALL TOO SELDOM see on these blogs.

ANdy qwhy

Neil Craig

The Guardian editor says "someone working at the Guardian deliberately falsified the list to exclude the three Israeli names"

Which is clearly what Melanie & we all suspected. No accident then. Now perhaps the Guardian editor will be saying which Guardian employee did it. That definition includes himself.

Anything short of a public naming & firing means it wil be done again. Typical behaviour from a newspaper that, to support unrepented genocidal Nazis, says that anybody who doesn't support him (Alia Izetbegovic) is guilty of "anti-semitism". Not merely racists thenn but hypocritical racists.

Alcove-One

To be fair, Stalinists are big fans of airbrushing out enemies.

dion

So much discontent, reasonate of post 1945 views. Appears you judge on a past English history.

Wake up the world is changing and requiring peace. Obama, like Kennedy promises much on issues of peace, and HAS initiated much in the US Senate and in Diplomacy. The Dalai Lama did the same, no, and slowly? Both promise the same. You can't see how prudish, your views of a failing middle class and wanna-be middle English people appear. You are viewed by a global readership. What did England do...1948? English diplomacy and self interest in the Middle East started yet another blunder in global future peace!!! Politics split the Middle East, led by Englishman, Churchill. Bah-humbug. A global reader who does not share you view or that of the Columnist.

John Manifold

Calmes-toi. The same formatting error kept the American Friends Service Committee from the initially-posted list.

solemnman

"once great paper"?
Malcolm Mugridge(sp.)in a bbc interview spoke about the period when he was a journalist in Russia on behalf of the then Manchester Guardian.He sent back reports on the famine that Stalin had induced that killed ,an estimated, ten million kulacks(sp.).The Guardian refused to publish his reports.It was,if anything, even worse before.

Augustus

dion - The world may be "changing and requiring peace", but what it does not
'require' is the demise of Western values, even though that may suit The Guardian and others. Apparently some Norwegians love that kind of thing, as much as some Americans, Germans, French, and British too. Obama is your new guiding light. A saint, if not a god. All he needed to do to earn the 'honor' of the Peace Prize was to stand up for that demise.

Rob

"The Guardian editor says "someone working at the Guardian deliberately falsified the list to exclude the three Israeli names""

No he didn't. That comment was from a poster on here!!!

Melanie, are you or are you not going to correct your false assertion that only three names were ommitted and all were Israeli?

Oh, and ...
"Here’s a further curiosity. If you look at the years 1978 and 1994, although the Guardian has air-brushed out the names of Begin,Peres and Rabin it has apparently added in the name of their country, Israel, which is given in a neighbouring column"

Which does make the conspiracy theory of trying to airbrush out Israel seem rather less likely and the cock-up explanation seem a little more likely. But then you really can't argue rationally with conspiracy theorists.

Tyrone Slothrop

@dion
October 10th, 2009 3:52pm

Obama, like Kennedy promises much on issues of peace

You are obviously ignorant of recent history. Do the names Bay of Pigs, Cuban Missile Crisis and Vietnam mean anything to you? These were all events during JFK's administration. Don't get me wrong, I wish Obama had the kind of guts that Kennedy did, but unfortunately the comparison with Chamberlain is more apt.

PUB

Hi Ms. Phillips, I'm American and I lived in England in the late 90's, saw my only Death to America rally there.

What's with your British people? Why the hell do they LOVE Muslims that have caused so much trouble in your kingdom?

I JUST don't get it. Please don't tell me that the BBC is "leftist" or that your politicians are. The population mirrors those beliefs. What's the deal? Why would Brits LOVE people who commit terrorist attacks and attack Israeli civilians and hide behind their women and children -- and hate a thriving Western Israel?

Enough is enough -- I don't get what's wrong the Brits. Thanks

MV

Why the Guardian should remove these three unrepentant terrorists from the list I can't think (not least because there are others). Still, it's a start if we are to produce a list as it SHOULD BE rather than as it IS.

Hitman

Who reads the Guardinista rag anyway. Just ignore the fruitcakes.

jose garcia

John edwards

again you take us for fools, a rabid antijewish and anti israel newspaper didnt publish the israel PM noble price winners and you think that the sad excuse of split spreadsheets probided by the guardian is more than enough evidence.

what is next?

the palestinians are a peace loving people?

pete woodhouse

rob..........no-one is suggesting a conspiracy, rather that a rogue, meddling member of the guardian staff is the most likely cause of the omissions. given the guardian's history of employing a member of HuT, columnists like seumas milne and countless anti-israeli contributors to both the newspaper and CiF. that should, to all but the most irrational, be patently the most likely of the available options, especially when compared to the extreme un-likelyness of it being a mistake (in the millions to one)

Nick

PUB. It's very simple. The British support the underdog. We don't like bullies. The Israelis have massively superior firepower and treat Palestinians like animals. They enforce collective punishment. They steal their land. The presence of Israeli nukes hugely destabilises the Middle East. Is it any wonder we support the Arabs?

Marcus from the USA

Let us not forget that two of the three Israeli Nobel "Peace" Prize winners were terrorists (Begin and Rabin).

Nobel Laureate Menachem Begin was the leader of the Irgun, a Jewish terrorist group that was responsible for July 22, 1946 bombing of the King David Hotel, in which 28 British citizens were killed.

Nobel Laureate Yitzhak Rabin was a member of another Jewish terrorist group known as the Hagannah. During the 1948 Arab-Israeli War he led "Operation Danny" in which Hagannah fighters took control of dozens of Arabs towns and villages, and proceeded to expel between 50,000 - 70,000 Palestinians from their homes.

Giving the Nobel Peace Prize to criminals such as Arafat, Begin, Rabin, and Kissinger does not reflect postively on the prize or its selection committee, and doesnt come close to bringing peace to the world.

Man_on_Richmond_Bridge

Tut tut Melanie

Sure they we're just checking with the Israeli Foreign Ministry how to properly spell their surnames................

My arse they were...............
more left bias

Dion

Many seem to love to hold onto the pains of past deeds, or their memory of such, not living in the changing present, and thereby cannot see prospects for a better future. If you stop, look around you, all on our very small world,is changing.

Bobby

Simon Rogers has shown in another post that he owns the Google spreadsheet. He has now updated it so that it no longer has Israel in a smaller font than any other country. He has done so but made no mention of doing so or explanation as to why Israel was in a smaller font than any other country to start with despite commenting on other changes he made to the spreadsheet.

I still have a copy of the original screensnap at
clearspectacles.blogspot.com
Again it looks like someone was trying to make a subtle point about diminishing the importance of Israelis and Israel by placing Israel in a smaller font than every other country in the list. Add the likelihood of that to the omission of 3 Israeli PMs and it looks much more likely that a particular staff member was deliberately trying to make a point about diminishing Israel.

I have asked him the following on the Guardian blog:
Please explain why only Israel had the small font and why, after I highlighted it, you changed it without commenting on it.

Arnie Sagnussen

dion.

How gratifying to read your contribution to this site.

I have always admired surrealist poetry.

Dion

Stop the hatred. Move on. Look beyond your own little tabloids, their owners and journalists, with their historic agendas. Read beyond your boarders-it is now an ever smaller Globe.
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/10/10/obama.gay.rights/index.html#cnnSTCVideo
An Australian.

just Louise

PUB, many of us Brits love America. We're still grateful to our American cousins for Marshall Aid. We realise that our two great democracies stand or fall together. Unfortunately, since the war this country has changed almost beyond recoignition, a change spearheaded by the lefties who infest the BBC, who in self-hating fashion loathe everything the West stands for, who have imposed censorship via political correctness, and who have made common cause with some very dubious allies of the woman-oppressing kind. Then, too, there are Brits who are jealous of the USA for being the world's great power, a position we once held, but have long since lost.
Those of us who refuse to be brainwashed by the BBC and the leftwing "intelligentsia" know full well that the destiny of Britain, Australia, New Zealand, and the other great democracies whether English-speaking or not, is inextricably linked to the destiny and welfare of the USA and with beleaguered Israel.
Chin up!

SUSAN HILL

One would be inclined to give even the Grauniad the benefit of the doubt if it had just been three random names - it was the fact that it was the three Jewish names of course that makes it look like no accident. I mean what are the chances of...
Quite.

Brett

John Edwards says: "Again as the Guardian editor has pointed there were more than three names omitted from the list. The omissions also included the Quakers and the Red Cross."

However, The Guardian did NOT leave out the Red Cross or The Quakers. It simply abbreviated two branches of "The Red Cross" with long names to a single generic "The Red Cross". It did not leave one out while including the other.

It did the same thing with The Quakers. They were NOT left out. The prize when to the Friends Service Council (aka The Quakers) and the American Friends Service Committee (aka The Quakers). The entry was abbreviated to simply "The Quakers", the name by which both associated groups are more commonly known.

Neither "The Red Cross" nor "The Quakers" were "left out".

phil

Nick no of course it is no wonder ,but it is nothing to do with bullying is it ? The remarks from those like you and the foolish marcus USA show exactly where you are coming from .

phil

PUB You are seeing here a few of the lefty,s and anti semites who invade this site because they can!! The massive proportion of us Brits love America and support its never ending fight for freedom ,please take no notice of the likes of marcus (supposedly)from the USA and others like him ,his opinions count for very little amongst most of us -believe me we remember Omaha beach and so many other selfless acts .

John Mackepo

I remember my school in Africa i was primary school then and one of my teacher said a Israeli man won the noble price it was about 1978 and I said what is his name? he told us Menachem Begin, even it was little difficult for me to say the name I knew that time about Israeli and how clever they are and later that day I heard in the radio, here The Guardians are making mistakes at this time which is shame! they either didn't have good education about history or they are racist we also know Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin won I would say about 1994 it was all about peace, the Jewish people don't teach their children not to blow up themselves or others

Fergus Pickering

I am British. I don't love the Arabs. Of course I bloody don't. Who in his right mind... I have no particular beef with the Israelis except for the murders at the King David Hotel and if Ican forgive the Catholic Irish for a lot more murders I think that one is water under the bridge. As for terrorists winning the Peace Prize, start counting. And if you coujnt Kissinger as a terrorist then pretty well ALL the winners would be terrorists, wouldn't they? Oh, except for Al Gore. He's just a prat.

John Edwards

They also had Kofi Annan down as US rather than Ghana.

No outraged comments from Ghananians so far.

Bobby

Brett,
The original list published actually did not even have the 3 additional errors. See the screensnap at http://dayvidsaffer.com/2009/10/09/guardian-no-israeli-nobel-peace-prize-winners-ever/comment-page-1/#comment-55

The only indication of this is that SImon Rogers said that they had those errors. SInce the original list on the site did not have them as evidenced by the above link, if we are to believe that they were errors, then they were corrected BEFORE posting the list on the web. If they found 3 such errors scattered through the list before posting, why wouldn't they check the rest of the list? ALso why was Israel the only country shown in a much smaller font in the original spreadsheet?

logdon

The Guardian's finances are in free fall. The future of the Observer is being debated. When the cash cow of Public Service job ads dries up under Cameron's promised draconian cuts, the diminution of income will increase massively. What then?

The whole of Europe has had it up to the eyes with cloying and suffocating socialist dogma and is rapidly moving rightwards.

Even the once ferociously loyal CiF brigade is showing huge signs of disconnect from the PC ridden waffling orthodoxy prevalent amongst the contributors.

Once dogma replaces fact the thinkers will depart.

The grubby class warfare this once revered newspaper reverts to is shown as sham by the recent expenses affair where Labour MP's are exposed as money grabbing opportunistic parasites.

Not quite the cloth capped ragged trousered philanthropists of yore, more akin to the tired old image, brokered time after time by the Toynbee's, Ashley's and Milne’s of cliched Tory greed.

Add to the stew, the mindless and grotesque anti-Semitism, thinly disguised under the dishonest banner of anti-Zionism, (as if this makes it OK) , and the picture of irrelevance is complete.

OK, Obama, (after a mere eleven weeks of hollow promise) got his gong but that Nobel committee still lives in the stale, arid world of faux happy clappy and the fallout is already overwhelmingly negative.

They, like the Guardian are propellants to their own irrelevance. Rotting from within, the stench of decay oozes from their pores.

For these gray haired ex student Marxists, the fall of the Berlin wall must have been as shattering as the Nakba to the Arabs. They’re living in a topsey-turvey world where Lenin, Castro and Erich Honecker are still heroes.

Omitting Begin, Peres and Rabin is either the Guardian’s pathetic attempt at a bizarre whitewash or the mother of all Freudian slips. Both, just as bad. The first blatant, the second the subliminal racism these people love to lecture us horrid proles about.

Still, as Melanie points out, another intifada is on it’s way over synthetic grievance at the Tempe Mount. We’ll have more to think about if and when this internationalises.

When, judging by the way the cartoon debacle lit up these eternally outraged specimens, being favourite.

Welcome to the Brave New World where the reciprocity of mutual propping up benefit allows secular, socially distributive feminist supporting marxists to cosy up to a seventh century worshipping, mysoginistic and hugely tribalistic entity with not the slightest bit of self examination. Or explanation to the rest of us.

As they used to say in Bradfordistan, (now twinned with Mecca), there’s nowt so queer as folk.

John Edwards

Interestingly the Guardian Data Blog also has a posting "Nuclear Waeapons: how many are there and who has them" dated 25th September.

This originally stated "Latest data on how many nuclear weapons there are in the world shows that - even with some being dismantled there are still 23,574. So between the US,Russia China, North Korea and Iran, we can be destroyed many times over"

There were quite reasonable objections that Israel is among the countries with nuclear weapons which have been omitted from this list, while Iran which has none is included, and North Korea has the fewest warheads (only 2 out of 23,574).

As a result of the complaints about such pro-Israel bias at the Guardian the orginal statement was changed to omit references to any countries. Also "Iran = 0" has been removed from the data completely.

Simon Rogers also had to correct data errors on his posting on "Size of armed forces - country by country"
pointed out by readers

Who'd want to be a Grauniad editor?

logdon

"OK, Obama, (after a mere eleven weeks of hollow promise)"

That should read days. My benevolence overcame accuracy. Sounds familiar. Do I get a Nobel Prize, too?

Jacob A.

While this year’s selection seems to be worthwhile, I was disappointed that no Israeli author received. There are at least three such authors worthy of the award:

The most mentioned is Amos Oz, though, I would prefer either A.B. Yehoshua, or David Grossman.

Also worthy of the award are Aharon Appelfeld and if he is still alive, S. Yzhar.

Is it possible that the Nobel committee is boycotting Israeli writers?

Groovy Times

Well said Logdon, a nice critique of the bankrupt morality, cowardice and hypocrisy that has become the cornerstone of the Guardian World View.

logdon

If in need of sanity try this

http://cifwatch.com/2009/10/

Amazing isn't it? CiF so bad there's now a rebuttal site created specifically to counter the lies.

Henry Sidgwick

My dear Groovy Times, Logdon's rant is a very fine parody of the apoplectic frothing Daily Mail reader of leftist mythology. Is your response a continuation of the parody, or have you perhaps been duped (I must admit the performance is masterly)?

Truthtriumphs

Logdon.
I second that!

cifwatch.com is an excellent site and well overdue.
It's good that CiF is being held to account, and that they can't have a completely free run.
It's also lively and well written.

David

John Edwards,
You haven’t responded to the following two posts as yet which contradict your view that Melanie’s article is poorly researched and exaggerated in their accusation.
[1] Pete Woodhouse (October 9th, 2009 9:19pm) who correctly estimates the statistical probability of ALL three Israeli premiers being omitted from the Guardian list as being far too small to be regarded as simple error.
[2] Brett (October 11th, 2009 11:31am) who explains that neither "The Red Cross" nor "The Quakers" were left out as you had claimed earlier when you argued that they represented two further examples (in addition to the omission of the 3 Israeli premiers) of simple clerical error on the Guardian’s behalf.
I’d be keen to hear your response to their points.

Margaret Muller-Johansson

I like The Daily Mail, The Financial times, The sun, The Daily Telegraph, The Jewish Chronicle, The Times, The Big Issue but I don't like The Guardian...

Geoff Miller

Veritatem cognoscetis et veritas te liberabit.

Motto in English:

You will know the truth and the truth shall set you free. ...

Obviously no-one at the Grauniad has the least interest in the truth.

How can they - they are Marxists and there is so much awful truth about their ideology that it's no surprise that they can so easily ignore it.

logdon

“Henry Sidgwick
October 11th, 2009 9:31pm

My dear Groovy Times, Logdon's rant is a very fine parody of the apoplectic frothing Daily Mail reader of leftist mythology. Is your response a continuation of the parody, or have you perhaps been duped (I must admit the performance is masterly)?”

No parody, Mr Sidgwick and isn’t it odd that defenders of the bent and biased always equate any dissent with tedious and sneering reference to that fabled species, ‘Mail readers’?

Does reading the Guardian confer some kind of other worldly judgmental status? Something, by the way decried by the PC brigade when applied in other circumstances, but obviously never them when pouring their jeering and juvenile scorn.

However the mindset of Cif readers seems to have been afflicted with the curse of the Mail as evinced by this.

“Even the once ferociously loyal CiF brigade is showing huge signs of disconnect from the PC ridden waffling orthodoxy prevalent amongst the contributors.”

I also add....

“Once dogma replaces fact the thinkers will depart.”

Obviously the dogma is everlastingly branded in your soul.

Never mind, you'll soon be talking amongst yourself, the way things are headed.

phil

Logdon -I do hope you will not become ensnared by the ridiculous person who calls himself Henry Sidgwick and thereby insults the memory of a well respected philosopher ..His sole purpose seems to be to annoy serious contributors as he did with Linda Smith .He continually sneers at anything Israeli whilst trying unsuccessfully to appear intelligent .Please do not stoop to answer his nonsense ,he just wastes our time .The posters here are free to make their comments as we are free to ignore them .He no doubt will be a huge success at the guardian.

Sam ARMSTRONG

PUB:

I am going to have to berate you like I do all Americans who ask the question: "what's up with the Brits?"

As you can see, a commercial magazine is playing host to a journalist who is highly sceptical of Muslim immigration. And she hasn't been arrested, nor has the mag (Spectator) closed down. So we don't LOVE Muslims. We have a pernicious left wing (as do you) which is allied to a 'progressive' gvt and media (as is yours). We face the threat of social outcasting and arrest if we go too far in our criticism.

This is all on it's way to a hick town near you, very shortly. It already exists in the large cities.

You also drivel on about "The population mirrors those beliefs". Well, Mr PUB, how about your country voting for Obama? The ultimate appeaser de-luxe of radical Muslim values?

So really PUB your rant is racist and unfounded. And your question should be: "What's up with the Brits and the Americans". Because make no mistakes, the dark shadow of Muslim colonisation is cast long over your land too. And your dude in the White House is encouraging it every step.

It all starts with cultural exhaustion, leads to rejection of the culture from within that culture as well as from without, and ends in appeasement of alien groups who are much more barbaric than the host.

Have a nice day now.

Henry Sidgwick

Logdon,

"Add to the stew, the mindless and grotesque anti-Semitism, thinly disguised..."

"Rotting from within, the stench of decay oozes from their pores."

"...mutual propping up benefit allows secular, socially distributive feminist supporting marxists to cosy up to a seventh century..."

You were serious? All this...stuff...wasn't a joke? How embarassing for you.

logdon

phil
October 12th, 2009 4:14pm

Thanks for the advice, Phil.

I see's he's at it again in that high handed put down way only idiots can muster when serious rebuttal eludes their tiny minds.

By the way, I stand by every word he finds so amusing.

Brian Moshe

The Guardian's long-term future could be assured (for a while, at least) if some wealthy Arab or group of Arabs were to buy it.

After all, it has many Arab and Muslim friends and with Arab ownership could reach the logical destination towards which it is heading.

Skeptic

>>>>>>>Wake up the world is changing and requiring peace.

Which, apparently, "requires" that Israelis winning the Nobel prize should be airbrushed out and thrown down the memory hole. Shows you what kind of "peace" "the world" is demanding according to the Guardian.

Skeptic

I didn't know the Guardian was so pro-Israeli. It certainly saved the one living Israeli winner (Shimon Peres) the embarrassment of being reminded he shares a "peace" prize with Arafat, Gore, Carter, and now (literally for doing nothing) Obama.

Skeptic

>>>>>So really PUB your rant is racist...

I have no disagreement with Sam's general criticism of PUB's posting -- namely, that Britian and the USA are both threatened with what Sam calls "cultural exhaustion" and appeasement due to the malaise of "multiculturalism" and similar diseases of the mind.

But that even Sam, un-self-consciously, calls PUB's posting "racist" when what he means is something like "unfair", "wrong", or "I disagree with it", shows how deeply the thought police had injected its poison into the national psyche.

just Louise

Meanwhile, on the website of Al Beeb, the Guardian's companion in arms, reporter Katya Adler (who's on record as expressing her admiration for the journalistic style of Jeremy Bowen) has been putting the boot into Israel; notice how Israel's claims re casualties are always reported by Al Beeb after claims by Israel's enemies, and in such a way as to imply that the Israelis are lying.

Henry Sidgwick

Logdon, I know I shouldn't, but:

"that fabled species, ‘Mail readers’?

Does reading the Guardian confer some kind of other worldly judgmental status?..." -Would that be the fabled species 'Guardian readers' at all, at all?

Are you sure there wasn't even a tiny bit of self-parody or irony? No? Self-awareness? No?

l

"Brian Moshe
October 12th, 2009 10:01pm "

Maybe a name change to The Sharian would seal the deal?

logdon

"Brian Moshe
October 12th, 2009 10:01pm "

Maybe a name change to The Sharian would seal the deal?

phil

logdon methinks he is getting desperate now -the silence is killing him :)

Dion - Aust.

I think it's time to move on all. This article is now redundant! I've learned, judge yourself before you judge others... Hope is hope. A Global Reader from down south, Australia. I feel it is time to stop the bashing...and yapping....

Archie

Nick: Speak for yourself. You certainly don't speak for me!

mostly harmless

logdon
Amazing isn't it? CiF so bad there's now a rebuttal site created specifically to counter the lies.

Have you seen cifwatchwatch.com, created to counter the lies of cifwatch, created to counter the truth of cif.

T Barnet

Read here for what happened: http://www.economist.com/blogs/lexington/2009/10/in_defence_of_the_guardian.cfm

andi pandi

this is distressing..

lets hope that the guardian is not going the same way as the daily mail..

Molly

I think you might be interested in what A.B. Yehoshua has to say about Americans for Peace Now...a pro-Israel pro-Peace organization. http://peacenow.org/entries/a_letter_from_ab_yehoshua