September 21, 2003

For the thousandth time, here is...

A big squirming pile of weasel droppings moral equivalence from the Ombudsman of the Washington Post, explaining why they won't call someone a "terrorist" just because they blew up a bunch of Jews in a pizza parlor...

..."When we use these labels, we should do so in ways that are not tendentious. For example, we should not resolve the argument over whether Hamas is a terrorist organization, or a political organization that condones violence, or something else, by slapping a label on Hamas. Instead, we should give readers facts and perhaps quotes from disputing parties about how best to characterize the organization."

The guidance also quotes Foreign Editor David Hoffman: "If the Israelis say they have assassinated a terrorist, we should not embrace their labeling automatically. We may say he was a suspected terrorist, or someone the Israelis considered a terrorist, or someone the Israelis say participated in a terrorist act. In other words, we should always look independently at whether the person has committed an act of terrorism, whether we know sufficient facts to say he has or has not and what the facts are. We should always strive to satisfy our own standards and not let others set standards for us." ...

There's lots more. One might read it and conclude that the WaPo was bending over backwards to be careful and fair...if there weren't so many other Bourgeoisophobe Leftys who always, after oh-so-scrupulous calculation, conclude that it's not terrorism if you kill Jews.

(via Betsy Newmark)

Posted by John Weidner at September 21, 2003 9:12 AM
Weblog by John Weidner