Iqbal Jassat's recent letter "Israel ousts Tutu to hide brutal policies" refers.
His attempt to label Israel as having "snubbed" Archbishop Desmond Tutu by denying his Human Rights Council team a visa is irrelevant - and he knows it.
Though Tutu has expressed his sympathy for the Palestinian cause, that was not the reason for Israel's indifference. As Israel has explained, the mission represented the newly formed United Nations Human Rights Council, launched in March to replace the discredited Human Rights Commission.
Ostensibly, the purpose was to "investigate the Beit Hanoun massacre in Gaza" - although Israel has fully explained what happened and has apologised.
Since its first meeting in June, the HRC has passed 10 resolutions - all against Israel. Not even Darfur has raised sufficient ire to earn a single resolution of condemnation.
The HRC finally sprang into action and announced it was sending a fact-finding commission to Darfur.
By the time this tour has taken place - the report written, tabled, discussed and ignored - how many thousands will have died?
Why should Israel should host a "fact-finding mission" from a body as biased against it as the HRC?
Victor Gordon, Brooklyn