Alex I'm surprised that you think that either news reporting or editorial content of US newspapers is any more factual or less biased than those elesewhere in the world. They are all there to push a viewpoint. There may be varying degrees of intent, but all editorial functions impose the world view of the editor.

If I could elaborate a point of view which is prominent amongst commentators and personal contacts on this side of the world, and which seems to have been either missed or misinterpreted in the US. NO-ONE condones the action on Sept. 11th, nor do they think the US 'deserved it'. What we have problems with understanding is the degree to which the US as a whole seems to be surprised that anyone would want to do this to them.

I believe that to a large extent it is not a US thing per se, part at least is based on the fact that the US is the dominant world power militarily and economically. I don't think any honest person expects the US to be or behave any better than any other country, but there is a definite perception that the US itself thinks that it is. And in this, as in most things in life, it's perception not facts that count. The perception in the rest of the world, NOT just the muslim part of it, is that despite protestations after Sept 11 the US will continue to support terrorists and 'state sponsored terrorism' if it is done by friendly states or in support of things in the US interests, but not otherwise.

To bring this back to the original point of press bias, it is noticable that the killing of an Israeli politician is reported in the Western media as an assassination, but the killing of Palestinian leaders is reported as being "in a strike by Israeli forces."

Pete M