Does the New York Times really think that an op-ed like the one in today's edition by Michael Oren actually makes up for the harm done by yesterday's piece by Noam Chomsky? I'd say there's no way they're quite that naive, but they are, after all, the New York Times and they probably are that naive.

I'm too upset about the article to post anything that I wouldn't be upset about later, or that my audience would not admonish me for posting online, so I'll keep quiet. But I do think it was very indicative of the opinions and views of the members of the NYTimes op-ed page board. They're just not intelligent enough to follow it up with a comparable piece by, say, Meir Kahane. Not because I necissarily believe that Kahane was right [as the bumper stickers say all over Israel], but that Chomsky's piece was so vitriolic that the only way to balance it would be printing something on par with Kahane's writings. There, I'm done, comment if you'd like.