Every so often I’m asked, “What is the most controversial issue you have to deal with from letter-writers?” The answer always seems to surprise people: “The Israeli-Palestinian conflict.” And with the situation in Gaza deteriorating, I’m bracing myself for the expected escalation of hostilities among some of our readers.

More so than any other issue, the Mideast crisis provokes not only harsh letters from those on each side of the issue, but complaints about our publication of same from those who say that the letters promote hatred, bigotry, etc., are full of “lies” and don’t deserve to make it into print. Some of this feedback over the years has been helpful in trying to ensure that we be fair to both sides. We do try to tone down the worst of the name-calling (and reject the truly over-the-top letters), but the violent nature of the conflict does provoke strong emotions, and it is to be expected that writers staunchly defending one side or the other will end up engaging in an unpleasant “shouting match” on our pages. And, yes, they will cherry-pick facts and interpret events through their own biases, which makes their letters about as “accurate” as, for example, letters that try to place all the blame for the recession on “the Democrats” or “the Republicans.” That is what makes them “opinion,” and, as long as there is at least some factual basis behind these opinions, each side will be entitled to express theirs on our Editorial Page.

In the days ahead, we will also likely receive letters from both sides complaining about “our biased reporting” of this issue, even though our international news stories come from wire services and are not staff-written. (A “local reaction” story did appear Sunday on the Gaza conflict, as well as another one on the India-Pakistan crisis.) At least one person will make the patently false assertion that “Whenever XXX attacks YYY, you bury it in the B Section, but when YYY attacks XXX, you run it on the front page with a big, screaming headline!” And on and on.

Obviously, we’re not going to please everyone when it comes to this issue. And when the back-and-forth letters exchanges become repetitious, or veer from the current crisis to argue about who did what to whom 2,000 years ago, that’s when we may start relegating the debate to the Web so that opinions on other topics can be heard. In the meantime, however, expect things to get heated on our Editorial Page over the next few weeks.