<
Finally, the Boston Globe gets around to reporting the massacre of Christians in Pakistan, instead of continuous page 1 lamentations about civilian casualties in Afghanistan.


since it happened yesterday, when would you have preferred that the Globe "finally" gets around to it?


And what does the writer do? In the allegedly factual article, the writer comes out of left field and blames the attack on (guess who) Bush, both for his choice of words and for his military strikes into Afghanistan. To doubly emphasise the writer's bias, the writer concludes with Pakistani quotes lambasting our military strikes. The reporter did admit that this information was NOT provided or claimed by the attackers, i.e. it is the reporter's conjecture.


Where does the writer blame Bush? He quotes from several sources, including two American pastors who have been there many years, and who indeed are the only ones linking the the massacre with the bombings.
At evening Mass at Our Lady of Fatima, attended by all of a dozen people, the Rev. John Nevin condemned both the killings and the US strikes on Afghanistan.
In Behawalpur, Nuttall agreed.


Now let me see. No massacres of Christians for years. Now one completely coincidentally timed with the bombing of Afghanistan.
Nope, cant see a single connection there. <sarc off>

Bias is in the eye of the beholder.

Tony