Friedman defended …

USUALLY I look forward to the commentaries of James M. Wall. But I am having problems digesting his attack on Thomas Friedman (Nov. 6-19). I have yet to see anything in Friedman's writings that would indicate he is "intimidated and controlled by the propaganda machine of the American-Jewish lobby in Washington."

And since when has Wall turned to CIA analysts such as Kathleen Christison for unbiased opinions? Wall's column seems to rely almost entirely on her for describing Friedman's flawed thinking. Yes, there are Palestinians who want to exterminate all Jews and destroy Israel. Where, however, did Friedman ever state that all "Palestinians have no goal in mind other than killing Jews"?

The peace offer made at Camp David is still being debated by historians and political theorists, and no simple conclusive judgment has been made on it. Wall acts as if all the upstate returns are in and its weaknesses are self-evident to all.

The last half of his column depicts Friedman and Ariel Sharon as comfortable bedfellows. In actuality, Friedman has been consistently critical of Sharon and has repeatedly questioned his motives. Wall sees Friedman as a major contributor to the current U.S. stance regarding Palestinian-Jewish relations, when Friedman has had no impact on the Bush policies in the Middle East. Rather, like Wall, he has criticized many of the oppressive and deadly acts of Israel against the Palestinians.

Roger Woods
Sarasota, Fla.

COPYRIGHT 2002 The Christian Century Foundation
COPYRIGHT 2008 Gale, Cengage Learning