Color us shocked and amazed that the LA Times would hand over their op-ed page to a terrorist enabling traitor. This right here? This is us being shocked. And amazed:

Poll - Rank the following hypothetical scenarios in order of awesomeness:
(1) that the LA Times approached Bishara because they really wanted to be a propaganda bullhorn for terrorist enabling traitors
(2) that Bishara was thinking to himself "what major US paper is most likely to let me turn it into a terrorist bullhorn for my terrorist enabling treason" and the answer he came up with was the LA Times?

We don't know why they didn't just follow routine LAT practice and let Laura King write up this anti-Israel propaganda as a news report. She could even do that clever thing where journalists smuggle in their bias by quoting lunatics they agree with ("but some Palestinians say" - no one ever catches that). Maybe she missed her filing deadline because it took extra time to translate her article from the original Arabic on the pamphlet.

Bonus poll - Rank the following actual events in order of awesomeness:
(1) The LAT giving their paper to Azmi Bishara to justify his treason
(2) TIME giving their magazine to Tariq Ramadan to slander the Pope
(3) The WaPo giving their paper to Ismail Haniyeh to lie about his genocidal lunacy

(h/t: MR reader Jason)

References:
* Why Israel is after me [LAT]
* Staying Neutral the Los Angeles Times Way [MR]
* Egyptian Sandmonkey Takes Exception To TIME's Embrace Of Tariq Ramadan [MR]
* Uhh... When Did the Washington Post Start Letting Terrorists Publish Propaganda? [MR]

Previously:
* LA Times: What About All the Good Things Islamists Do?
* LA Times Bias
* I Wish I Had An LA Times Subscription, So I Could Cancel It

Cross-posted to:
* Israpundit
* The Astute Bloggers