A poor excuse for journalism in the New York Times, and biased to boot!

This morning I read Israeli Is Killed in the West Bank in the New York Times. This is the letter that I wrote to that (so called) story's author:

Wow! Those surreptitiously sneaky Israelis dared to fail to make an appointment to go and pray! Of course the Palestinian Authority Police simply HAD to shoot to kill after firing warning shots! And of course the Palestinian youths can be excused because they only set SMALL fires to the holy site.

There are gaping holes in this story even before you added in the biased language I highlighted above. For example, did these "police" make any serious attempts to stop what was obviously a familiar civilian vehicle before resorting to deadly force? What could have triggered the use of deadly force in the first place- did the civilians threaten the police in some way? Did the civilians aim weapons at or try to run over the police or something like that to actually justify being shot at? And for that matter, what did these "small" fires consist of? Trash? parts of the site complex? Molotov cocktails? And hasn't such vandalism happened before?

I'm sorry, but leaving such gaping holes in a story and writing with such a biased tone makes me seriously question your own credentials as a journalist. This story wouldn't even pass on Wikipedia!

As an exercise, I would like you to read this story you wrote, but replace Israelis with Canadians and Palestians with Americans. Makes those holes and bias I mentioned pretty glaring, eh?

Easter is a traditional day when Christians would kill Jews, I would've thought you might be more sensitive. So sad that these families have to mourn on Judaism's big holiday, Passover.