But were the refugees’ depictions of life in the camps overstated, as some human rights workers wonder? And were they brought to the United States to advance a foreign country’s claim on their homeland?I liked that this article, unless the Associated Press's, used persuasive sources to talk about human rights abuses in Western Sahara. There wasn't nearly as much talk about Moroccan human rights
Two other things about the article annoyed me. First, Robert Holley gets the last word, seemingly reasserting his point of view against the earlier doubts. Why not quote SADR ambassador Mouloud Said in the end, or an unbiased NGO? I know I sound like a talk radio caller railing against the biased liberal media, but there it is.
Second, why does the Times need a Moroccan-sponsored publicity tour to write an article about Western Sahara? It's one of the most oppressed places in the world, but they can't bother to send a reporter. Potential stories abound--union busting at Bou Craa, students being thrown out of windows--but unless the interviewees are only a few blocks from the Times office, no one there thinks about Western Sahara.
A lot better than what's generally been coming out of this lobbying offensive, though. Plus, this is a great time to get a letter in the most respected U.S. newspaper about Western Sahara.
Photo from Flickr user wallyg used under a Creative Commons license.