No apologies for the wet dreams of the Guardian and the Age

I've been reading the comments of Guardian readers on cif in reaction to an editorial on the Toulouse murders - Toulouse shootings: in the line of fire.

Incredibly, the Guardian has the gall to still refer to Merah's atrocities as "shootings" and not "murders" in much the same way as "terrorists" who fire missiles at school buses are elevated to the status of "militants" but that's another thing ... or perhaps not?

However, it was somewhat uplifting to read cif. Instead of the usual vitriol against Israel and the Jews that I have come to expect from cif, I found a substantial amount of anger among readers sickened by the failure of the Guardian and/or columnist Fiochra Gibbons to provide some mea culpa for the errors contained in last week's op ed in which Gibbons exculpated jihadism and antiSemitism as a motive in the Toulouse murders. The editorial itself also gets the treatment from its readers. 

I really enjoyed the post of finduskeepus but the general gist of what the readership is saying must be recognised by the Guardian.

And by the Age which, needless to say, has yet to comment about the sheer stupidity of the Gibbons article. Gibbons was way off the mark so the silence of the Age is problematic. But then so is it's dismissal of the funerals of the Jewish victims and the disappearance of its Middle East Bureau chief at the very same time.

It seems to me that the Age might have cause to worry that, like the Guardian, not all of its readers are idiots.