Regarding the front page article, News Analysis: Arabs feel bias in Bush's Visit to Mideast (Monday, May 19, 2008): you’ve got to be kidding! The article points out that Bush praised Israel during his visit to celebrate their 60th anniversary, but that the “mood was markedly different” when he addressed the Arab nations. And this is held up as an example of bias? Some simple questions: do women have equal rights in the Arab nations? What is the status of the gay community in Arab nations? What about the status of religious freedom? How about freedom of the press and freedom of speech? Was there anything inaccurate in the president’s criticisms? Then why do you make it out to be a bad thing for the president to point out that those Arab countries remain repressive and backward? And in answer to the inevitable complaint about the Palestinians, another simple question: if I point out that murdering your brother is a bad thing, does your retort about my horse stealing somehow justify your murderous behavior? The only real bias I see here is in the mind of the journalist responsible for this article and in the newspaper that printed it.
Thursday, May 22, 2008
Letter in the LA Times
Sometimes I get upset enough to write a letter to the Los Angeles Times. I've been subscribing to it for over thirty years now and most of the letters I write get published; they seem to like my style (actually, it's relatively easy: keep the letter short, say something inflamatory, and make sure you're responding to something from the front page). In any case, I responded on Monday to an article on the front page of the paper and they published what I wrote today: