Letters
An affront to decency
Sir: Paul Johnson's crude and intemperate article ('An affront to decency') in your issue of 3 September does no service to the. Zionist cause. It does however reinforce the ilnpression that the press in this country can Print calumnies against the Arabs and, on occasion, against Islam (eg. 'There is something about the religion of Islam that stinks' Spectator, 13 August) with impunity, whereas any attempt to make a case against Israel provokes an hysterical reaction, Mr Dahl's language may have been emotive, but what else can one expect when those who try to put the record straight feel they are speaking to the deaf? They shout in the hope of being heard; and, at least in this case, Mr Dahl's choice of words has resulted in wide publicity for his views. Mr Johnson seems to be the victim of long exposure to Zionist propaganda. He even dredges up the tired old myth that the Arab states made an unprovoked attempt to strangle the new State at birth, although It has long been known that they acted — unwillingly and half-heartedly — in a vain attempt to prevent the expulsion of the Palestinians from their ancestral lands by rnealls of a campaign of terror (the 'cleansing' of Israel from its Arab Population, as the Zionists put it). They sent 15,000 poorly trained troops (with 22 light tanks) against 30,000 regulars and 32,000 second-line troops, and the outcome Was never in doubt. There was a time when Mr Johnson, as a Patriot', would no doubt have demanded the death penalty for Begin, Shamir and Others involved in the murder of British soldiers; but apparently the 'mass murder' .of Lebanese civilians 'by shelling and bombing'
attempt (an accusation which he does not
pt to refute) is acceptable. The most
J_ohrisen, curious feature of Mr
s article — and the justification for describing it as 'hysterical' — is that it contains little if any serious argument. He takes for granted the self-evident falsity of every charge brought against the Israelis, and that is that. This can hardly qualify as responsible journalism, and I do not think 1 could be accused of inaccuracy if I described it as 'an affront to decency'. Gai Eaton described it as 'an affront to decency'. Gai Eaton 35 Riddlesdown Road, Purley, Surrey
Previous page
