Omitted it, you say? But the fourth sentence in the BBC story says: "An Israeli interior ministry spokeswoman said it was to trying to clear the matter up and allow Prof Chomsky to enter." I guess four whole sentences was too much to wade through?
Guess my sentence is too much to wade through as well. I said he will get access to Israel as he has done in the past, which the newpapers mentioned, but the BBC didn't. The BBC presents this story as if this is a new development and as if Chomsky hasn't given lectures in Israel in the past.
Sorry, I was under the impression that the Britian was the place where English originated from....
It's an ongoing trend to refuse entry to people who disagree with aspects of government policy?
Could very well be. I do think that there should be some restraint overall with these entry refusals, albeit the army does tend to make things difficult, but not impossible, and I doubt people like Chomsky understand this concept.
I do, however, agree that there should be some limitations on how many of these self-proclaimed liberals of the left-leaning persuasion are allowed into Israel, and when I mean limitations, I mean a balance between the different types. How to provide this balance, is beyond me. One can whinge all they want about censorship if one lets in
x number of university speakers, political activists, etc. instead of
y number of a certain part of the political spectrum, the end of the matter is, and this is where I rarely agree with Dershowitz, is that I don't want Israel to turn into the US or UK education system where leftists have an overwhelming influence in said systems.
I don't like this whole pitting of the right against the left and usually steer clear of it, but in some cases one has to bring up these sensitive issues.
As for Chomsky himself deeming this a 'fascist action', I think Chomsky would even find the concept of a toll booth fascist
