Your View: Casting aspersions doesnt propel America foreign policy


To the editor:

I am responding to Jack Lichtensteins depressing response to my complaint about a one-time Alexandria resident named Sanford Horn (Charge of dual loyalty a low blow, June 30, 2011). 

Mr. Horn used the Times to deride United States foreign policy because he felt it was injurious to Israel. The intent of my complaint was to protest that Mr. Horn structured his argument in a manner that left no doubt he was more passionate about Israel than America. 

Mr. Lechtensteins rejoinder was depressing because it introduced aspersions (e.g., religious bias, dual loyalty) that stifle a candid discussion about whats good for our country first and foremost in this tempestuous part of the world. It also contended Israels democracy protects it from reproach. Wrong.

Finally, I complained that the Alexandria Times, a community newspaper featuring neighborhood news, should now balance the article submitted by non-resident Mr. Horn with one from a creditable source explaining why the Palestinians are so enduringly hostile to Israel. The goal is to make informed decisions about whats good for America nothing more.