I thought BlahBlahFlowers' owner Loz's comment from below deserved more prominence:
"In what crazy world does an article by two people who, by their own biographies, might be considered to have an interest in Israel be called independent?"
And my response:
"I don't know if the JC sees itself as briefing the Zionist movement as to a "party line" or if it sees itself as deceiving its readership. Probably a bit of both."
Now I know the JC's editor Ned Temko is an avid visitor here so perhaps he could tell us. Is he lying with. his readers or to. them? Also he might want to explain why no url was given for www.bbcwatch.com. My suspicion is that had people have been able to click or otherwise go straight to the BBC watch site they would have known immediately that it was a Zionist site and therefore not independent at all. So what does that make Ned Temko? A deliberate liar? Well yes actually....unless he can refute it. Still at least it means he sees himself as pulling the wool over the eyes of his readers. If he wanted them to share in this latest "big lie" he would have posted a url.
Palestionian prisoners' DAY
5 minutes ago