You are reading a single comment by @starfish&coffee and its replies. Click here to read the full conversation.
  • Interesting, but I ask if you believe they painted a full picture. I remember how badly The Economist downplayed and brazenly rejected the data on Obama-ordered airstrikes in Pakistan. I've never got a sense that they're impartial, independent and balanced since then, though they do a better job than many.

    Did this article cover the Sheikh Jarrah controversy and the related issues, how Jewish Israelis (an important distinction in this particular case) in areas of the West Bank are allowed to make 'claims' over land that they supposedly owned before 1948, wherein falsified documents were used? Case in point - that infamous, Brooklyn idiot (and there are many like him) who "settled" in Palestine and stole a portion of the family's house, and the best thing he could say on camera for the whole world to witness was, "If I don't steal your home, someone else will"? Of course, all this was illegal under the UN, international law, and all those other useless bodies that can't enforce jack.

    Edit: maybe Zionist Israelis is a better term.

  • Did this article cover the Sheikh Jarrah controversy and the related issues

    No, the point was to highlight all the land grabs that did not cause controversy.

About