The Guardian and Mail Compete To Be The Most Bigoted
WRITES Peter Wilby in the Guardian:
The Daily Mail is in many (no, most) respects a dreadful paper, relentlessly stoking the worst human emotions: prejudice, bigotry and hate.
No so much stoking the worst as reinforcing fears and hatreds reinforcing them among its right-minded readership.
But what of the Guardian? The paper’s former writer Julie Burchill signed off her final column by citing the Guardian’s’s Jew hating, the “dirty little secret masquerading as a moral stance”:
But if there is one issue that has made me feel less loyal to my newspaper over the past year, it has been what I, as a non-Jew, perceive to be a quite striking bias against the state of Israel. Which, for all its faults, is the only country in that barren region that you or I, or any feminist, atheist, homosexual or trade unionist, could bear to live under.
Cranmer sense anti-semitism as the Guardian:
And Richard Ingram topped the lot with his Daily Mail, sorry, Guardian piece about how Jewish and gay writers should declare themselves as such so they can be dismissed:
I have developed a habit when confronted by letters to the editor in support of the Israeli government to look at the signature to see if the writer has a Jewish name. If so, I tend not to read it.
Not only the Joos should sign their words with a yellow star but:
Too few people in this modern world are prepared to declare an interest when it comes to this kind of thing. It would be enormously helpful, for example, if those clerics and journalists who have been defending Canon Jeffrey John, the so-called gay bishop, were to tell us whether they themselves are gay. Some do, but more don’t.
Maybe if they wrote their letters could lean so far the left they almost lean very far to the right, like the Mail…
Posted: 27th, October 2008 | In: Reviews Comments (5) | TrackBack | Permalink
