No Politics, Please

I'm sorry to have to object to a posting (8/11/04) by my esteemed colleague and friend, Peter Vardon. Peter writes brilliantly about Israel, but I'm afraid he's gone off his rocker in his attack on John Kerry.

First of all, and most important, this web site is no place for partisan politics. This is a web site devoted to exposing the Post's biased reporting in the Mideast conflict. We should welcome Republicans and Democrats, pro-settlement and anti-settlement adherents, Jews, Christians, and yes, Muslims, who only want to see the Post tell the truth about Israel. Yet, Mr. Vardon has used this as a forum to call Kerry "slightly wacko" and imply that he lied about being in Cambodian waters in 1968. The "wacko" slur seems to refer to a story that Kerry carries in his briefcase a "good luck hat" from Vietnam. What the hell is wacko about that? As for his being in Cambodia, how dare anyone who wasn't there call him a liar?! Mr. Vardon might want to read the letter in today's Washington Times from a fellow SWIFT boat commander who says "I also went into Cambodia", and states there is no reason to doubt Kerry's story. (Even his detractors would have to admit that Kerry is certainly smart enough to know where he was.)*

Even Peter's claim that the Post lied about the Kerry story is suspect. His claim rests on a third party report that the bylined reporter denied in a phone call that she wrote a particular passage in the story. There could be a lot of reasons for that; e.g., that passage might have been inserted by a home office editor. Or the third party could have misheard or even lied. So this charge doesn't hold water, and in any event, falls far short of the mortal damage given to the truth when the Post reports about the Mideast, which is our real business here.

Today's article is a good example. While my two esteemed colleagues have already reported flaws in the article about the checkpoint bombing, I would like to add a comment of my own:
It's interesting that two other papers in Washington-Baltimore got the story right: The Baltimore Sun's article led off with "A Palestinian bomber detonated explosives..." and the Washington Times headline read "2 Palestinians die in Fatah bombing" (my emphases). ONLY THE POST failed to mention that it was a Palestinian act until the 9th of 11 paragraphs. So much for the "Who" of journalism that is supposed to be so important. And when it finally got around to it, they added the quote from an anonymous caller: "This is a response and reaction to the occupation's crimes in the West Bank and Gaza Strip". In doing this, the Post perpetuates its myth that Palestinian terrorism is directed against Israeli occupation of these areas, rather than against the very existence of Israel.

The facts and the logic are very simple. If the Palestinians want peace and a state of their own, all they have to do is stop the attacks. This is precisely what the road map calls for, and precisely what hasn't happened. The problem, of course, is that the Palestinians want a lot more than the West Bank and Gaza - they want Israel also, and Israel is fighting for it's life. That's the story the Post doesn't want you to know.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
*If anyone objects that I too am being partisan, my response is that I am only canceling out the damage done in the earlier blog, not trying to start a dialogue. We have had an erroneous, inappropriate post and now a rebuttal, and I hope that will be the end of partisan politics on this web site.