It has turned into an automatic Pavlovian part of the vocabulary of New York Times reporters and editors. "It," in this instance, is the West Bank. But notice that it never is merely the "West Bank." This geographic term clearly doesn't meet the ideological test of the paper's copy mavens.No, the Times has forbidden its use. Without failing, it must be referred to as the "occupied West Bank." All three words have become obligatory The latest example: A May 24 dispatch by Isabel Kershner from Jerusalem that tells readers that Noam Chomsky, a fierce critic of Israel, was "barred by Israel from entering the occupied West Bank." Why append "occupied" to the West Bank when, under the Oslo agreements, Israel ceded effective control of major portions of the West Bank to the Palestinian Authority? Why "occupied" when more than 90 percent of West Bank Palestinians are under PA rule? Why "occupied" when Palestinian...(Read Full Post)