Wednesday, September 17, 2003

SULLIVAN'S ILLITERACY: Andrew Sullivan's reading comprehension problems surface again:

Who says we can't keep an award for a legend in media bias? Here's the Guardian today on the Israel-Palestinian impasse:
The militant groups abandoned the truce on August 21 after Israel assassinated a Hamas leader in a missile strike that followed a suicide bombing which killed 22 people in Jerusalem.
Wouldn't that chronology suggest that the truce was ended first by the suicide bombing - or would that imply that Israel isn't always at fault?
To answer your question: The suicide bombing was preceded by kiling of Mohammed Seder, head of Islamic Jihad's armed wing in Hebron, on August 14th. Before that two Hamas militants and an Israeli soldier are killed in Israeli raid on West Bank refugee camp. On the same day. two more Palestinians are killed in protests. Is it of importance? No.

Why is he accusing the Guardian of bias? That sentence--that one sentence--implies a fact: the date of the terror groups' abandonment of their truce, which occured on August 22 after the IAF assassinated two Hamas leaders. The assassination was in retaliation, tit-for-tat style, for the Jerusalem bombing.

What I think? He's mad because the Guardian called him a "neo-conservative." The Guardian hit the nail again when they called it "the domain of the Freedom Fry-munching, BBC-hating, anti-European, talk-radio-style Republicans." And that's what Sullivan is.


Post a Comment

<< Home