Earlier this year, President Bush posthumously honored Cpl. Jason Dunham with the Medal of Honor.  At a subdued White House ceremony, Dunham was recognized for his heroism in April of 2004, where he threw himself on a hand grenade to save the life of his fellow Marines.

Receiving the Medal of Honor is this nation’s most prestigious honor, and since the beginning of the war, it has been awarded only two times. These rare medal ceremonies are among the most solemn and dignified events conducted at the White House, and they have been likened to the bestowal of knighthood in other countries.  It is the ceremonious method this country has established to recognize gallantry and valor, the most extraordinary of human characteristics.  

Dunham’s medal ceremony was an historic event, but one which was completely ignored by the New York Times.  Although the Times employs a full-time White House correspondent, and boasts a full compliment of staffers in its Washington bureau, no mention of the ceremony appeared anywhere in print. It failed to mention Dunham’s heroism, his character, or his family’s acceptance of the award on his behalf. In fact, a search on the New York Times website will result in just two articles which mention Dunham by name. One article is a book review that mentions Dunham’s actions, and the other is an article using his name to criticize the Bush Administration’s management of the Iraq conflict.

Fast forward to May 4, 2007, and the Times prominently posts an article about a Cuban army officer killed during a failed airplane hijacking (http://tinyurl.com/2vr33q). The slain officer was awarded Cuba’s highest honor, the Medal of Valor. The article also goes into great detail to describe  the man's character,  and such personal traits as his “sense of humor and dedication to duty.”

The article repeats the communist regime’s claim that the man was killed as an ''act of terror promoted by the United States, '' because Cuban officials criticize the U.S. policy of trying hijackers in a U.S. court, rather than returning them to Cuba to face trial.

How could the Times ignore the heroism of Jason Dunham, yet willingly report on one of Fidel Castro’s military heroes?  Is this proof of the New York Times “liberal bias?”  Probably not. But was it a bumbling mistake or purposeful omission?

As a respected corporate citizen whose news reporting is among the best in the world, the Times should do better. Because the Times chose to recognize a Cuban hero rather than an American hero, they have dishonored the memory of Jason Dunham, ignored the distinguished legacy of the Medal of Honor, and insulted all those in uniform.

If the incident is not a purposeful snub meant to express their opposition to the War on Terror, then the Times should admit the error was just another in a series of blunders. They should also issue an apology to the Dunham family for disrespecting their son, and his supreme sacrifice for our country.

If it was something other than a mindless oversight, then we shouldn’t hold our breath for an apology. In that case, shame on the New York Times.

Shame, shame, shame.