Follow the petrodollars and accompanying raw power, follow the ideological and populist lineages, follow media's and academe's contorted disseminations. It all leads, in terms of social/political and moral coherence, into a cul de sac, a dead-end of self-regard and outward neglect.

Never mind that the monies and raw power support, for example, the Arab Muslim regime in the Sudan, in addition to the mendacities and malevolence in the Levant. When the glitter and dazzle of being feted is at issue, such triflings can be studiously ignored.

What a depressing read. Melanie Phillips is a bit of a firebrand herself when it comes to being partisan, but if even one-half of what she says is true, or even if there is some context left out, this is still damaging enough.

It just goes to show how deeply entrenched anti-Zionism is in their worldview. They actually think that pro-Zionist bias has to be fought. Actually it's insufficient hostility to Israel, neutrality, or some vestigial sympathy for Israel that they're looking to stamp out. All under the name of getting rid of "bias." George Orwell, where are you when we need you?

This is quite different from American media which relies heavily on the Israeli-run MEMRI and journalists with no training in Arabic or even basic knowledge of Middle Eastern history.

Actually most of American media is disgustingly pro-Islamo-Nazism (though not to the same degree as European media).
Just check your local newspaper. Or for that matter Camera or honestreporting.

It is inapposite in the extreme to think of Melanie Phillips as a partisan firebrand, an ascription which can only be considered in pejorative terms. Someone like a Barney Frank can be thought of as a partisan firebrand, likewise a Harry Reid or a Pelosi; in fact that's among the nicest things that can be attributed to that troika. Or, among the commentariat, a Roger Cohen could be thought of as a partisan firebrand. (Or is Roger Cohen the very opposite of a firebrand, more along the lines of a seducer who leads others into a complacency and even a somnambulant state, via incomprehensions and more mendacious appeals?)

By contrast - while Phillips commonly tackles some of the most difficult and controversial issues concerning Israel and the M.E., and the globe at large, also within Britain more specifically - she writes trenchantly, incisively, coherently and cogently. Thus one can similarly agree - or disagree - on a coherent and cogent basis, rather than an arch and rhetorically infused basis only.

The fact that detractors so often resort to name calling, labels, misdirection and diffuse forms of rebuttals in general reflects upon those detractors, not upon Phillips.

That is said not to take you, Joanne, to task, as I don't presume to know your own intent more specifically, but Melanie Phillips is a decidedly honest, forthright and incisive articulator of issues and positions of note. Unfortunately, something of a rarity as well in that vein, in large part because ours is an era permeated with ideologues, along with the underlying dogmas, presumption and systematic deceits they bring with them, the corresponding lack of gravitas and grounding.