Anti-American these people probably are, but I think another reason for the slip of the pen or tongue is this: for the do-gooder organizations like Human Rights Watch, the Iraqi people aren't real. They're just wogs, a mere generation out of the desert, and so can't be truly civilized and worthy of the respect of the oh-so-civilized folks at HRW and elsewhere. I think that's why they won't hold the "insurgents" to the same standards of conduct as they hold our troops to-- the "insurgents" don't show up as human on their mental "radar screens". Sadly, neither do the victims of the "insurgents" show up-- I guess they aren't human, either.

Feh.

^No doubt. And it's also why they don't believe in the core theory behind the whole effort - they don't believe mere Arabs are capable of democratic self-government.

Or alternatively, Hale, we might remember that socialism believes that individuals may be sacrificed for the good of society as a whole. The old Bolshies were pretty open about this; now it's a more covert idea, and will be denied if you ask. But in fact we see it every day. I think this is an example--the victims of the terrorists are being sacrificed (spiritually speaking) by this person for the good of the cause. They are "real," but expendable.

My underlying philosophy is that the truest evil lies in treating people as things. This is a conclusion that author Terry Pratchett comes to in his fantasy satires, and a conclusion that my priest independently came up with a major homily on. (He had never read Pratchett, but the concept and phrasing are nearly identical.)

Treating people as things is one of the hallmarks of sociopathy.

It was also a constant theme of John Paul II.

Nice.

I actually know John Sifton, though I realize you have no reason to believe me.

He's been quoted elsewhere as saying that "I am not trying to let the Iraqi police off the hook here, they are implicated in something like this almost every week, but this is the Marines, the most highly trained of our troops."

I am sure he would not dispute that Zarqawi & pals are implicated in a massacre about every week as well. He meant the most serious crime by US troops.

He spent the year before 9/11 in Afghanistan, has described seeing bodies that the Taliban left dangling from the lampposts in Kabul. He was the Afghanistan researcher for HRW before he got drafted into the anti-torture stuff--came really close to getting himself shot at least once.

Some "fake". What a great example of someone who thinks that other people are expendable. Jesus. He's got more courage and honor in his pinky than you have.

Maybe, but I'm doubtful. Lefties of all stripes were anti-Taliban before 9/11. It was a big topic on campus, Bamayan etc, and feminists were outraged over burquas, etc.

But that changed instantly after 9/11, and none of them ever said "Thank you President Bush for liberating the people whose plight we have been bemoaning." They all flipped over to faking counts of civilian deaths and criticizing the US for every mis-step.

And Iraq is the same multiplied by 100. The critics always have some weasely little "Yes al Qaeda is also bad" line, but it's only an American mistakes that make them sit up and take notice.

This one crime is going to get more press and attention that all the hundreds of thousands of hideous tortures and murders of Saddam combined. I know nothing of Mr Sifton personally, but he is embedded in a culture of fakes and frauds and utterly dishonarable scoundrels.