Madam, - It seems to me that while most people who are opposed to US foreign policy are prepared to make their case on the basis of facts and rational argument, their opponents all too often resort to name-calling, caricature and lazy terms such as "Bush-hater" and "anti-American".
Even in your own newspaper of record, the ongoing "debate" about the rights and wrongs of US foreign policy seems to consist all too often of name-calling and a failure to address the facts.
In addition to your regular columns by Kevin Myers and Mark Steyn, who constantly and falsely deride their opponents as pro-terrorist and pro-Saddam, your edition of October 6th featured another blast of vitriol. Susan Philips (Opinion and Analysis) assures us that the "Bush-haters" are fooled by the media bias of "our strongly liberal and left-of-centre media".
On your Letters page of the same day Robbie Roulston condemns the "rigid and blind anti-Americanism" which has "regained its stronghold in the public mindset".
If our media really were so biased and if knowledge of the reality of US foreign and military policy really was so widespread, would it be possible for Michael Meade, on the same Letters page, to suggest that those who criticise the US agenda are non-Earthlings with addled brains? Would it be possible for anyone to describe America's contribution to the world as "generally benign" if our media had really being doing its job down the years?
Why, if we really do have an anti-US media, do otherwise well-informed people need constant reminding of the crimes and the dreadful slaughter perpetrated by the US and its proxies in Cambodia, Nicaragua, Guatemala, El Salvador, Indonesia, Laos, Lebanon, etc. etc.? - Yours, etc.,
PAUL CARROLL,
Churchfield,
Clane,
Co Kildare.
****
Madam, - I would like to inform Susan Philips that not all those who "identify with George W. Bush's Judaeo-Christian belief of good and evil see him as a visionary, a man ahead of his time, to be supported absolutely".
Some are aggrieved that he and others of the far right have hijacked Christianity for their own ends and in so doing, with a very thin veneer of belief, duped many into supporting their political ideals, most of which are incompatible with the Jesus of the New Testament. - Yours, etc.,
J. JOHNSON,
Patrician Villas,
Stillorgan,
Co Dublin.