Dear Editor,
"Thousands flock to Bethlehem" (12/26/10) describes Bethlehem as "the town where, according to biblical account, Jesus was born." Interestingly, "Young Russians in search of faith flock to Islam" (12/21/10) states that Islamic Prophet Ibrahim "intended to slit his son Ismail's throat but sacrificed a ram instead.” The event in Islam is reported as fact while Christianity is explained with a caveat. Would The Washington Post please explain this inconsistency to its readers?
Sunday, December 26, 2010
Thursday, December 9, 2010
Letter to Washington Post
From: mberenhaus@comcast.net
To: letters@washpost.com
Sent: Friday, December 10, 2010 10:49:53 AM
Subject: What Analysts?
Dear Editor,
In [U.S. tactics in Mideast talks criticized (Dec. 9, 2010)], the subheadline states, "Analysts say Obama should have stuck with calls for the settlement freeze," and the first paragraph says "The Obama administration's decision to stop seeking a new Israeli settlement freeze... has diminished prospects of achieving a peace accord... analysts said Wednesday". However, in the article, surprisingly, there was not a single analyst cited who concurred with these claims.
An Israeli political commentator Akiva Eldar for the Haaretz newspaper effectively said that the freeze made no sense. Aaron David Miller, a former U.S. peace negotiator, said that the freeze was "the wrong focus." The only other person quoted was not an analyst but chief negotiator for the Palestinians Saeb Erekat - of course he is going to say that it was the fault of the Obama administration. But I hope the Washington Post realizes that a negotiator for one side isn't an "analyst". So where are these analysts of whom The Washington Post speaks?
Michael Berenhaus
To: letters@washpost.com
Sent: Friday, December 10, 2010 10:49:53 AM
Subject: What Analysts?
Dear Editor,
In [U.S. tactics in Mideast talks criticized (Dec. 9, 2010)], the subheadline states, "Analysts say Obama should have stuck with calls for the settlement freeze," and the first paragraph says "The Obama administration's decision to stop seeking a new Israeli settlement freeze... has diminished prospects of achieving a peace accord... analysts said Wednesday". However, in the article, surprisingly, there was not a single analyst cited who concurred with these claims.
An Israeli political commentator Akiva Eldar for the Haaretz newspaper effectively said that the freeze made no sense. Aaron David Miller, a former U.S. peace negotiator, said that the freeze was "the wrong focus." The only other person quoted was not an analyst but chief negotiator for the Palestinians Saeb Erekat - of course he is going to say that it was the fault of the Obama administration. But I hope the Washington Post realizes that a negotiator for one side isn't an "analyst". So where are these analysts of whom The Washington Post speaks?
Michael Berenhaus
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)