I often speak of the pressure that the New York Times is under from rightwing supporters of Israel. What follows is further evidence of the editors’ responsiveness: They bend over backwards to reverse the meaning of an important article saying that Israel is destroying the two-state solution.
Try to imagine them being so responsive on say, gun advocates pushing their case that guns don’t cause violence in the U.S. or global warming deniers insisting that the crisis is man-made.
A couple of weeks ago the New York Times published a good story by Jodi Rudoren and Mark Landler about Israel’s settlement plans for the E-1 corridor east of Jerusalem, which were a retaliation for the Palestine upgrade at the U.N., and the two reporters stated that the colony could prevent the creation of a “viable, contiguous Palestinian state” because it
would limit access to the the West Bank cities of Ramallah and Bethlehem from Jerusalem to only narrow corridors far from the Old City and downtown Jerusalem. If such a project were to go beyond blueprints, it could prevent the creation of a viable, contiguous Palestinian state.
Well, this is an article that keeps getting updated.
The Israel lobby group CAMERA is bragging that it has prompted two corrections by the New York Times. My boldface:
After CAMERA contacted The New York Times to discuss several erroneous claims about the effect of proposed construction by Israel in the E1 corridor between Jerusalem and Ma’aleh Adumim, the newspaper issued the following corrections
Here are the corrections by the Times editors– about as long as the original article!
December 8, 2012
Because of an editing error, an article last Saturday about Israel’s decision to move forward with planning and zoning for settlements in an area east of Jerusalem known as E1 described imprecisely the effect of such development on access to the cities of Ramallah and Bethlehem from Jerusalem. While development of E1 would limit access to Ramallah and Bethlehem to narrow corridors far from the Old City and downtown Jerusalem, it would not completely separate those cities from Jerusalem.
An earlier version of this article referred imprecisely to the effect of planned Israeli development in the area known as E1 on access to the cities of Ramallah and Bethlehem from Jerusalem, and on the West Bank. Such development would limit access to Ramallah and Bethlehem to only narrow corridors far from the Old City and downtown Jerusalem. It would also create a large block of Israeli settlements in the center of the West Bank; it would not divide the West Bank in two.
Because of an editing error, the article referred incompletely to the possibility of a contiguous Palestinian state. Critics see E1 as a threat to the meaningful contiguity of such a state state because it would leave some Palestinian areas connected to one another by roads with few exits or by circuitous routes; the proposed development would not, technically, make a contiguous Palestinian state impossible.
Thanks to Max Blumenthal and Joseph Dana.