>>I think you do not believe the writer. But how can you be sure that you are right? Why is the bias 'obvious' then?
>
>In the very first paragraph, he describes the captives as "human debris". While he may feel that way, it isn't exactly unbiased reporting. He isn't there to determine whether or not they are in fact guilty. He is there to see how they are being treated. Immediately, my suspicion is raised.
According to the news of a few days ago, the U.S. does not want to give the United Nations access to investigate. Well, they say they will give them access, but it is so restrictive that the U.N. declines to accept. I am not sure what the official excuse is, but it seems quite obvious they have something to hide.
Difference in opinions hath cost many millions of lives: for instance, whether flesh be bread, or bread be flesh; whether whistling be a vice or a virtue; whether it be better to kiss a post, or throw it into the fire... (from Gulliver's Travels)
