For those of you who get your information about israel from the Guardian, here is how it and other papers botched an issue that is a). important, dealing with the now-infamous cartoons, and b). could have been very easily verified, as all they needed to do was pick up a copy of the Jerusalem Post, and c). naturally, was given an anti-israeli spin.
Can't say I'm terribly surprised.
The Jerusalem Post chose not to republish the incendiary cartoons... At the same time, while the cartoons are readily accessible on various Web sites, we felt that the readers of our print edition ought to have some sense of what it was that people in our region were burning embassies and threatening massacres over.... so,... on an inside page of our Monday paper we carried a one-column wide reproduction of the original page of the offending Danish daily Jyllands-Posten - the cartoon page, that is, scaled down to perhaps a fortieth of its original size. Ma'ariv, incidentally, had done the same a day before.
...
Britain's Guardian newspaper, which this week has carried reams of copy from its correspondent here examining the "explosive comparison" between Israel and apartheid South Africa, promptly and inaccurately reported on its Web site that "The Jerusalem Post today became the first Israeli newspaper to publish the controversial Danish cartoons depicting the prophet Muhammad that have sparked furore across the Muslim world."
...
The Guardian's excited effort to haul Israel to the center of the cartoon battlefield on the strength of what it acknowledged, lower in its text, was "A facsimile of the original page from the Danish paper... one column wide and about two-and-a-half inches high," was dwarfed, however, by the hysterical reaction of the Norwegian press and government.
Two leading Norwegian newspapers not only asserted, as the lead item on their Web sites, that the Post had published the cartoons, but were so kind as to manufacture our reason for doing so. "The English-language paper says it is publishing the drawings to enable people to understand the Muslim reaction," one of the sites reported, quite unperturbed by the fact that "the English-language paper" had not said anything at all.
Can't say I'm terribly surprised.