>Ifg we want to persuade ordinary people of this, we
>should get them to see the policy this way rather than
>call them names.
Perhaps, but its only human to call a spade a spade. The Australian held hostage in Iraq held a press conference the other day and was asked what he thought of his captors. His reply? "Arseholes!"
An Australian Muslim cleric is reported as warning that this won't win the hearts and minds of the hostage takers in Iraq and may even endanger other hostages. The same point you make.
I take your point. Nevertheless it is essential to condemn this kind of barbarous behaviour in the strongest possible terms, whoever the arseholes are. Otherwise, how are people to understand that it is unacceptable?
If you hear someone defend torture and unlawful imprisonment, as practiced by the US government and other criminal thugs, then there is no room for ambiguity in your response. Ideally it would be nice to convince them of the error of their ways, but not at the risk of playing down how vile you think it is.
Diplomacy has its place I suppose, but when dealing with arseholes your primary duty is to avoid excusing their behaviour or allowing it to become more acceptable.
Bill Bartlett Bracknell Tas