Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 07:15:37 +0530 From: "Frederick \"FN\" Noronha" <[email protected]>
John Dayal is not the only one to get thus targeted. Vijay Prashad, who has been in the forefront against communal intolerance, has another interestingly-distorted page on the Wikipedia. Mario responds: I have no idea whether John Dayal is a radical Christian or a fanatic. My guess is that he is a good man. However to suggest that he was unbiased as a journalist is laughable. His friend and colleague, Hartman de Souza, unintentionally perhaps, showed that he clearly had personal biases that must have skewed his news reports about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. We also heard about his emotional involvement in warning Sikhs of danger, a commendable and humane action, but which had to have biased his news reports in that conflict as well. None of this makes John Dayal a bad person - only one whose reporting needs corroboration and context before taking it to the bank. Vijay Prashad, on the other hand, was in the forefront of the organized assault on the integrity of Sonal Shah, deliberately using unrelated evidence in order to smear and slander her. He is about as tolerant as Karl Marx, whose plausible-sounding but illogical philosophy has caused more misery and misallocation of resources around the world than any other human being. Unlike Dayal, Prashad benefits from the munificence and freedom of American academia, funded by the fruits of capitalism, while busily working to undermine the fundamental philosophies of freedom and capitalism that made America the altruistic society that it is today.
