If you read Norman Finkelstein's Beyond Chutzpah: On the Misuse of Anti-Semitism and the Abuse of History (UK: http://bit.ly/myOIB ; US: http://bit.ly/2g2bJ7 ) you'll find the one instance of disagreement about a single event between Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and B'Tselem he was able to find in perusing all their reports. In terms of their reporting and conclusions, there's (mostly) little rational reason to prefer one above the others. (In fact, Finkelstein has directed most of his recent ire towards HRW, for being too pro-Israeli owing to their sources of funding.)

In the NYT, I refer you to the two volumes I mentioned in my above comment:

There's also the recent volume from Verso: Israel-Palestine on Record: How the New York Times Misreports Conflict in the Middle East <a href="http://bit.ly/YuKSw" target="_blank">http://bit.ly/YuKSw .)
I often find reading the NYT a slightly amusing exercise, particularly in areas I'm knowledgeable about (I can give you the citation for an article by some pissed-off musicologists, if you wish...).

Addendum: I think I'd recommend most books on Verso's understanding Israel-Palestine list: http://bit.ly/VersoIP (pdf).

There's also the recent volume from Verso: Israel-Palestine on Record: How the New York Times Misreports Conflict in the Middle East http://bit.ly/KAGMr . (It's a sequel to The Record of the Paper: How the New York Times Misreports US Foreign Policy http://bit.ly/YuKSw .)

Well of course Herzl didn't envisage Modern 'Hebrew': all civilised people speak German; - thus that was the only possible language in his Altneuland. And Herzl's 'solution' to the 'Arab problem' has many things in common with what eventually happened; in the words of L.M.C. van der Hoeven Leonhard (my emphasis):

The existing landed property was to be gently expropriated, any subsequent resale to the original owners was prohibited, and all the immovables had to remain in exclusively Jewish hands. The poor population was to be worked across the frontier ‘unbekempert’ (surreptitiously), after having for Jewish benefit rid the country of any existing wild animals, such as snakes. This population was to be refused all employment in the land of its birth.
Indeed, I think Herzl's vision becomes the most clear in the following passage from Altneuland, in which the protagonists meet the members of Herzl's New Society (summarised by Gabriel Piterberg):

Asked by Loewenberg what he is working on, the narrator remarks that ‘the scientist’s eyes grew dreamy’ and he replies: ‘the opening up of Africa’. When the perplexed Kingscourt repeats the statement, the professor explains that it has to do with finding a cure for malaria. ‘We have overcome [malaria] here in Palestine’, he says, ‘thanks to the drainage of swamps, canalization, and the eucalyptus forests. But conditions are different in Africa. The same measures cannot be taken there because the prerequisite — mass immigration — is not present. The white colonist goes under in Africa. That country can be opened up to civilization only after malaria has been subdued. Only then will enormous areas become available for the surplus populations of Europe. And only then will the proletarian masses find a healthy outlet. Understand?’

And people bleat about the evils of an academic boycott of Israel...

[mindless national jingoism]
Actually, Norway beats Sweden (according to the UN) - Sweden has had too much of a love affair with neoliberalism lately...
[/mindless national jingoism]

Dear me... what I don't like is the horde of ill-educated 'prescriptivists' who think language operates according to the definitions found in abbreviated dictionaries.
'Literally' has been used as an intensifier for figurative or metaphorical speech since the 1760s, and such usage is perfectly correct English. It was only in the 20th century that ignorant grammarians took offence at that and other examples of good English, and started 'correcting' them (and thus, the English language was molested by generations reared on the ramblings of Messrs. Strunk & White...). http://bit.ly/pXqXH

There's, inter alia, the 'Jewish Internet Defense Force' - whose web page is so hilarious I had difficulty at first believing it wasn't a parody. If you've read Glenn Greenwald on the faux warrior delusion one can find among the columnists at Commentary, National Review, &c., you'll recognise the symptoms. (I'm not going to link; you can find them easily enough through Google.)

Wow. I just listened to her talk and, if possible, I admire her even more. On the intellectual level, she sees the history of colonialism and its underlying economic motivations; on the personal level, she ends with a remarkably forthright statement on, and apology for, why it took her so long to join the call for BDS. Either she's an amazing actor (re the claim of opportunism), or she's a person of unusual integrity. I think it's the latter.

There's a streaming version here: http://palcast.org/2009/06/705.

Michael Palin participated in the Palestine Festival of Literature (see, e.g., http://bit.ly/ZoyU2 ), as did a number of well-known European authors (especially British). The highly popular Swedish author Henning Mankell (http://www.henningmankell.com/) was scathing in an article he published afterwards in a major Swedish newspaper. (English translation: http://bit.ly/tIj2t . The original Swedish had a more direct and angrier feel to it.) I suspect him taking such a public stance might have had an effect on his many loyal Swedish readers. So: things are happening, but one might not notice them in the U.S. :)