LTE 2

To the editor:
There was an article in the February 1st edition of the NYT talks about a Pakistani Taliban leader, Hakimullah Meshud. This article discusses how Mashud is believed to be dead but there is no proof. He is the one who admitted to setting up the suicide bombing against the C.I.A. is December and it is very important that we know if he is dead or alive since this was one of the biggest attacks against the agency in over 20 years. Belief keeps increasing but we have still seen no proof of his death. By publishing this article many people will forget all about the attack because the person responsible is dead, even though we don't know for sure. By saying it is believed that he is dead it allows people to forget and move on. I feel that it would be more appropriate to word it differently, and suggest that nobody knows if he is dead or alive, but not that people believe he is dead, especially since there is no proof.