Friday, July 16, 2010

Anti-Semitism, Still Awaiting a Response from The New York Times

TO: The Public Editor, The New York Times

Dear _______,

I still await your response concerning the grotesque anti-Semitic comment posted by the Times on July 12, 2010 in response to Ethan Bronner's article, "Israeli Military Finds Flotilla Killings Justified".

40.
rmarc
albany ny
July 12th, 2010
4:05 pm
Nothing new here. I guess I now understand why Iran wants nuclear weapons! If I lived anywhere close to fascist Israel, I would want them too. After all, if Israel can have them why not everyone else? I guess being gods chosen means never having to say I'm sorry! What claptrap. Imagine the creator choosing the most arrogant tribe on the face of the earth as his "special people"!
Recommended by 79 Readers

http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2010/07/13/world/middleeast/13flotilla.html?sort=oldest&offset=2

I would bring to your attention that this was only one of several abusive comments posted by the Times in response to the article in question.

If it is the opinion of the Public Editor or the Publisher of the Times that this comment is neither abusive nor inflammatory, please let me know immediately.

I would appreciate the courtesy of a response, so as to enable your readership and advertisers to make an informed decision whether they wish to continue to subscribe to or do business with the Times.

Again, I would note for the sake of good order that I will be publishing this e-mail as an open letter in my blog.

Regards,
Jeffrey

Thursday, July 15, 2010

Ongoing Tolerance of Anti-Semitism by The New York Times

TO: The Public Editor, The New York Times

Dear _________,

Further to our correspondence concerning the publication of anti-Semitic readers' comments by The New York Times, I wish to draw to your attention the following comment posted by the Times on July 12, 2010 in response to Ethan Bronner's article, "Israeli Military Finds Flotilla Killings Justified":

40.
rmarc
albany ny
July 12th, 2010
4:05 pm
Nothing new here. I guess I now understand why Iran wants nuclear weapons! If I lived anywhere close to fascist Israel, I would want them too. After all, if Israel can have them why not everyone else? I guess being gods chosen means never having to say I'm sorry! What claptrap. Imagine the creator choosing the most arrogant tribe on the face of the earth as his "special people"!
Recommended by 79 Readers

http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2010/07/13/world/middleeast/13flotilla.html?sort=oldest&offset=2

This is vulgar, anti-Semitic, abusive and inflammatory in the extreme, and if this is deemed to fall within the realm of the norms of The New York Times ("Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive"), it deserves to be disseminated to all of your readership so as to enable them to decide whether they should be subscribing to or placing advertisements in the Times.

Moreover, given the persistent recurrence of this phenomenon at the Times and the resultant damage, it is not enough that someone at your newspaper ultimately removes such vile comments days or weeks following their publication. This is an issue which should have been addressed by The New York Times long ago.

Have your "moderators" ever been instructed concerning the meaning of anti-Semitism and its potential repercussions? Have any concrete measures been instituted to put an end to this phenomenon?

I will be publishing this e-mail as an open letter in my blog and await your response.

Regards,
Jeffrey

Tuesday, July 6, 2010

The Bathurst-Norman Bag for Internet Sickness

By now, most who read this blog are aware of the recent decision of a Brighton jury to acquit seven "activists" who caused £180,000 damage to an arms factory, which they believed was manufacturing weapons used by Israel in Operation Cast Lead. After the initial acquittal of five of the defendants, The Guardian reported:

"Five activists who caused £180,000 damage to an arms factory were acquitted after they argued they were seeking to prevent Israeli war crimes.

The five were jubilant after a jury found them not guilty of conspiring to cause criminal damage to the factory on the outskirts of Brighton.

The five admitted they had broken in and sabotaged the factory, but argued they were legally justified in doing so.

They believed that EDO MBM, the firm that owns the factory, was breaking export regulations by manufacturing and selling to the Israelis military equipment which would be used in the occupied territories. They wanted to slow down the manufacture of these components, and impede what they believed were war crimes being committed by Israel against the Palestinians.

* * * *

The judge highlighted the testimony by Caroline Lucas, the Green MP for Brighton Pavilion, that 'all democratic paths had been exhausted' before the activists embarked on their action."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/30/activists-arms-factory-acquitted

Judge Bathurst-Norman's instructions to the jury and the jury's decision were scrutinized with great acuity by Robin Shepherd (http://www.robinshepherdonline.com/anti-semitic-juries-in-the-uk-may-start-decriminalising-crimes-committed-against-israeli-interests/#more-2919), Caroline Glick (http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=180523) and Melanie Phillips, who observed:

"But what really jumps out from this story is the direction the jury received from the judge in the case:

In his summing up, Judge George Bathurst-Norman suggested to the jury that ‘you may well think that hell on earth would not be an understatement of what the Gazans suffered in that time’.

Let’s get our heads round this, folks: an English judge in an English court of law effectively directed a jury to acquit people of criminally smashing up a factory, because he chose to believe Hamas propaganda about the suffering of people in Gaza during a war about which he presumably has no knowledge whatever apart from what he has read or seen in the media – a war, moreover, launched solely to prevent Gazans from aggressively firing rockets into Israel in order to murder its civilians, during the course of which war Israel went to heroic lengths to avoid hurting Gazan civilians who were being put in harm’s way by Hamas, the true cause of Gaza's 'hell on earth'.

Quite apart from the ignorance and bigotry of Judge George Bathurst-Norman, what on earth is a judge doing imposing his political prejudices upon a jury and thus taking the side of the defendants in the case he is trying – with the result that he effectively directed the jury to acquit them of a crime?"

(http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/6117164/the-hellish-histrionics-of-hove-propaganda-court.thtml)

I would be hard pressed to supplement the analysis of Mr. Shepherd, Ms. Glick and Ms. Phillips, and would only mention that hearing of this case made me ill and set me to thinking. Tomorrow I will be flying, and in the seat pocket in front of me there will be an air sickness bag. I do not suffer from air sickness, yet I do suffer from Internet sickness. This being the case, why not design a special bag for persons like myself who suffer while surfing the web? Such a bag designed for the Internet could hardly be called an air sickness bag and would surely merit its own appellation. Hence, after much thought and in recognition of this propitious decision by the Brighton court:

The Bathurst-Norman Bag for Internet Sickness

Saturday, July 3, 2010

Nicholas Kristof"s "Burrowing Through a Blockade": Biased or Just Plain Dumb?

In an op-ed in today's New York Times, Nicholas Kristof, describes his visit to some of the 1,000 tunnels bringing goods from Egypt to Gaza. After explaining that the tunnels are barely hidden, Kristof tells us that Israel's decision to ease its blockade is creating turmoil among the tunnel operators, which employs thousands of workers, and concludes, quite expectedly, that Israel should altogether eliminate its blockade of Gaza:

"The tunnel owners are aghast that Israel is talking about easing the siege and grumbled that they are already facing a huge drop in orders as a result. A significant number of tunnels have had to suspend work for the time being.

I wish Israeli and American officials could see these tunnels, too.

* * * *

Visiting Gaza persuaded me, to my surprise, that Israel is correct when it denies that there is any full-fledged humanitarian crisis in Gaza. The tunnels have so undermined the Israeli blockade that shops are filled and daily life is considerably easier than when I last visited here two years ago.

That makes it especially silly of Israel’s leadership to have squandered nine lives and its global reputation by seizing ships on the high seas — when the freight on that flotilla was probably less than what passes through the tunnels in a single hour.

* * * *

It’s time not just to ease the siege of Gaza, but to end it once and for all."

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/04/opinion/04kristof.html?hp

No shortage of goods in Gaza, and hence, no need for "flotilla" aid? Tunnel operators suffering from less expensive access to goods from Israel? Hamas suffering from diminished taxes on goods brought in via the tunnels? Already told you so (e.g., http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.com/2010/06/netanyahu-takes-wind-out-of-sails-of.html).

But entirely eliminate the blockade and allow the free flow of missiles by sea from Iran into Gaza, as demanded by Kristof? No way, Jose. Had Kristof spent any time whatsoever in Sderot, perhaps his left-leaning lobes would be a bit more sensitive to Israeli civilian suffering. As is, the world has allowed Hezbollah to ignore UN Security Council Resolution 1701 and bring 50,000 rockets and missiles from Iran and Syria into Lebanon. This is not going to happen also in Gaza.

Kristof wishes that "Israeli and American officials could see these tunnels". Is he really stupid enough to believe that he is the only one who has seen them?

Kristof also suggests that the tunnel operators "may be tempted to lob missiles at Israel if peace threatens to break out." More inanity. The tunnel operators are profit driven and do not engage in rocket attacks against Israel. On the other hand, with the flotilla PR ploy scuttled, Hamas has resumed rocket and mortar fire on southern Israel, and this is apt to intensify, given Hamas frustration with 8% GDP growth in the Fatah controlled West Bank, which has not gone unnoticed by Gazans.

Nick does mention the kidnapping of Gilad Shalit and the "unconscionable refusal of Hamas to allow him Red Cross visits." However, this is where Kristof's attempt at objectivity ends. No mention of:

• discrimination against women;
• honor killings;
• the grisly murder of Hamas opponents;
• discrimination against homosexuals;
• discrimination against Christians;
• the Hamas charter which calls for the murder of all Jews;
• ten thousand rockets, missiles and mortar rounds fired into southern Israel.

Unlike the tunnels, none of this ugliness finds its way into Kristof's column. Predictable and sickening . . .

New York Times Editorial "Congress, Sanctions and Iran": Selectively Enforce Sanctions

Incredibly - or not so incredibly - The New York Times editorial board today takes the position that sanctions approved by the U.S. Congress should be selectively enforced by Obama. As observed by this editorial:

"Extraterritorial sanctions are always problematic. They can open American companies to retaliation and provoke a political backlash.

* * * *

Unless they are used sparingly, they could strain relations and make it even harder to persuade governments of the need to isolate Iran.

* * * *

If Tehran keeps pressing ahead with its nuclear program, the international community may have to restrict gasoline sales to Iran. That could hurt ordinary Iranians and rally support for the government. Since the demand on foreign companies goes beyond what the Security Council is requiring, it could shift international anger away from Tehran and toward Washington.

* * * *

Congress is insisting that President Obama enforce this new law. It also gave him some room to waive punishments, on a case-by-case basis, on companies in countries that are cooperating with efforts to isolate Iran. Political and business leaders should give Mr. Obama every reason to do that. For this to work, the White House will also have to exercise considerable diplomatic finesse."

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/03/opinion/03sat1.html

This editorial fails to mention even once Iran's horrific oppression of Baha'is, Kurds and other minorities. The editorial would have Obama exercise caution in enforcing sanctions while Iran's Baha'is, Kurds, Sunnis, homosexuals and political dissidents rot in prison and are executed.

The Times editorial board warns that sanctions can lead to "political backlash"? Don't fundamental requirements of morality take precedent over any such "political" considerations?

While anguishing over possible "political backlash" instead of over an Iranian initiated atomic war against Israel or Iran's Sunni neighbors, I wonder whether The New York Times editorial board took into account the following letter from the children of Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani, who faces imminent excecution by stoning for alleged adultery:

"Today we stretch out our hands to the people of the whole world. It is now five years that we have lived in fear and in horror, deprived of motherly love. Is the world so cruel that it can watch this catastrophe and do nothing about it?

We are Sakine Mohammadi e Ashtiani’s children, Fasride and Sajjad Mohamamadi e Ashtiani. Since our childhood we have been acquainted with the pain of knowing that our mother is imprisoned and awaiting a catastrophe. To tell the truth, the term 'stoning' is so horrific that we try never to use it. We instead say our mother is in danger, she might be killed, and she deserves everyone’s help.

Today, when nearly all options have reached dead-ends, and our mother’s lawyer says that she is in a dangerous situation, we resort to you. We resort to the people of the world, no matter who you are and where in the world you live. We resort to you, people of Iran, all of you who have experienced the pain and anguish of the horror of losing a loved one.

Please help our mother return home!

We especially stretch our hand out to the Iranians living abroad. Help to prevent this nightmare from becoming reality. Save our mother. We are unable to explain the anguish of every moment, every second of our lives. Words are unable to articulate our fear…

Help to save our mother. Write to and ask officials to free her. Tell them that she doesn’t have a civil complainant and has not done any wrong. Our mother should not be killed. Is there any one hearing this and rushing to our assistance?

Faride and Sajjad Mohammadi e Ashtiani"

http://missionfreeiran.wordpress.com/2010/06/26/sakine-children-2/

Needless to say, I am horrified beyond words by this Times editorial.

Friday, July 2, 2010

Kristof's "The Two Sides of a Barbed-Wire Fence": What Nicholas Didn't Tell Us

In an op-ed entitled "The Two Sides of a Barbed-Wire Fence" (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/01/opinion/01kristof.html?ref=nicholasdkristof), New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof predictably slimed Israel for its treatment of the West Bank Bedouin village of Umm al-Kheir:

"where Palestinians live in ramshackle tents and huts. They aren’t allowed to connect to the electrical grid, and Israel won’t permit them to build homes, barns for their animals or even toilets. When the villagers build permanent structures, the Israeli authorities come and demolish them, according to villagers and Israeli human rights organizations.

On the other side of the barbed wire is the Jewish settlement of Karmel, a lovely green oasis that looks like an American suburb. It has lush gardens, kids riding bikes and air-conditioned homes. It also has a gleaming, electrified poultry barn that it runs as a business."

Kristof never bothers to seek an opposing view from the Israeli army or the Jewish settlers. He of course never asks the source of Karmel's water. He never asks why the Palestinian Authority has no responsibility for providing Umm al-Kheir with electricity or water.

No mention by Kristof of the eight percent GDP growth being enjoyed by the West Bank.

Although he mentions that a pregnant 19-year-old Palestinian woman in the village of At-Tuwani was hospitalized this month after an attack by settlers, there is no mention of the murder two weeks ago of a Jewish policeman (two others were wounded), who was ambushed while stopping to assist a Palestinian with staged car trouble (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/15/world/middleeast/15mideast.html).

Although Kristof observes that the residents of Umm al-Kheir are Bedouins, he doesn't stop to ask whether a Western apartment-living lifestyle is even desired by these persons.

But worst of all, Kristof doesn't tell us the number of residents of Umm al-Kheir. Kristof has written an op-ed about the purported suffering of only 22 families. How do we know? Because there is little difference between the content of Kristof's op-ed and the content of an April 14, 2010 item published by the "Israel-friendly" UNRWA, which takes the trouble to provide the number of families (http://www.unrwa.org/etemplate.php?id=648).

Why didn't Kristof provide the number of families? Because when five million have died in the Congo, millions more have died in Darfur, there are 400,000 Uzbek refugees in Kyrgystan, and there are 200,000 additional refugees in the Saada Province of Yemen, the purported suffering of 22 families (their water is overpriced) becomes palpably absurd.

I have two suggestions:

1. That for the price of a few Scud missiles, Hamas can fund palatial housing for these poor souls.

2. That Kristof look closer to home and vacate his house for the benefit of a group of homeless persons from Manhattan, who would very much appreciate the bathroom, bedroom and kitchen fixtures of his humble abode.

Fair is fair . . .

[I inquired with the Public Editor's Office of The Times whether Kristof's op-ed violated their standards of ethical journalism ("In print and online, we tell our readers the complete, unvarnished truth as best we can learn it"). Let's see how they respond.]

Thursday, July 1, 2010

No Genomics Revolution? Compugen's Answer

Recently we have witnessed a profusion of reports that despite billions of dollars spent on genomics research, it has failed to yield the bountiful harvest of medicines and diagnostics that had been anticipated following completion of the first draft of the Human Genome Project (see, for example: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/13/health/research/13genome.html?hp; http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/15/business/15genome.html; http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/21/opinion/21mon2.html?ref=editorials).

In an earlier blog entry, I took issue with this conclusion (see: http://jgcaesarea.blogspot.com/2010/06/decade-later-genetic-map-yields-few-new.html). The science underlying human disease may be far more complicated than originally thought, and the "mere" mapping of the human genome is plainly insufficient to provide the next generation of drugs, but as evidenced by the lonely pioneering efforts of a tiny company named Compugen, I believe that genomics is essential to the future of medicine.

Compugen has spent the past decade engaged in computerized modeling of biological phenomena at the molecular level, giving rise, inter alia, to proprietary maps of the human proteome (all of the proteins in the human body) and peptidome (all of the peptides in the human body). Compugen's 12 predictive discovery platforms, with more on the way, have already yielded multiple new drug and diagnostic candidates predicted in silico, i.e. by Compugen's computers, to validate these platforms, without the need for inefficient trial and error methodology.

How many of you have a friend or family member suffering from multiple sclerosis? Almost all of us know someone who has fallen victim to this devastating disease. I think Compugen's announcement of today's date, describing the in vivo testing of a heretofore unknown protein predicted and discovered by Compugen, speaks for itself:

"Compugen . . . announced today that administration of CGEN-15001 in an animal model of multiple sclerosis (MS) has been shown to completely abolish spontaneous relapses. In addition, administration of this novel molecule prior to disease onset demonstrated a pronounced delay of disease onset and a significant decrease in disease symptoms. These results, together with complementary results from earlier studies, strongly support a significant potential therapeutic utility for CGEN-15001 in the treatment of multiple sclerosis and other autoimmune diseases, such as rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, inflammatory bowel disease, and type 1 diabetes.

* * * *

Professor Stephen Miller from Northwestern University, a leading scientist in this field who supervised the studies, stated, 'The capacity of CGEN-15001 to prevent the development of disease in this well-recognized animal model for multiple sclerosis, and more significantly to ameliorate its progression when administered in the presence of pre-existing disease is quite dramatic. Furthermore, these beneficial effects were shown to be long lasting and persisted through the study, indicating that CGEN-15001 may prevent disease progression as efficiently as immune tolerance induction, a process whereby the immune system no longer attacks the self antigens that cause the disease. These findings, together with those demonstrated in our earlier studies, are unique among the molecules targeting the B7 family of co-stimulatory molecules that have been published to date.'”

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Compugen-Discovered-Protein-bw-3902315198.html?x=0&.v=1

As further observed by Compugen in an earlier press release with respect to the science leading up to the discovery of this protein:

"CGEN-15001 is a novel soluble recombinant fusion protein corresponding to the extracellular region of the Compugen discovered parent protein. The discovery of the parent protein, which is a membrane protein, was accomplished through the incorporation in Compugen’s LEADS Platform of additional algorithms specifically designed to predict novel members of the B7/CD28 family of co-stimulatory proteins. This approach relied on Compugen’s proprietary understandings and modeling of genomic structure, gene expression, protein structural domains, and cellular localization."

http://www.cgen.com/Content.aspx?Page=press_releases&NewsId=470

CGEN-15001 has yet to enter human clinical testing, and there can be no assurances that this particular candidate will ultimately become a therapeutic product. What we can be sure of, however, is that Compugen's predictive "discovery on demand" capabilities are constantly improving and continuing to yield an ever-growing number of significant therapeutic and diagnostic candidates, which are not confined to any one family of diseases, at a time when the pipelines of Big Pharma are growing drier by the day.

Unbeknownst to the world, we are witnessing, in my opinion, a scientific revolution in the making, which can no longer be ignored by Big Pharma and the scientific community at large.

[As noted in prior blog entries, I am a Compugen shareholder, this blog entry is not a recommendation to buy or sell Compugen shares, and in mid-September 2009 I began work as a part-time external consultant to Compugen. The opinions expressed herein are mine and are based on publicly available information. This blog entry has not been authorized or approved by Compugen.]