Christopher Hitchens (whose Washington DC address and assessed housing value are now known to me, thanks to my stalking tactics, and no I'm not telling) has another deeply disappointing article. Don't really bother reading it, it's just comes off rather half-baked and unbalanced. He even goes so far as to rail (justly) against the Iraqi regime for their flouting of the Geneva Conventions.
"To make an exhibition of captives is a violation of all the known laws of war," he says. But since he is using this as evidence to indict a criminal regime, it is dishonest to then ignore the same crime committed by the US towards its prisoners in Guantanamo Bay. If he had said execution rather than exhibition, maybe I'd buy it.

The rest of the article is more of the same: protesters are mindless twits, other nations' leaders are butchers and we can thank our lucky stars we don't have the blessings of their criminal regimes, and what's all this talk about "innocent" civilians...aren't soldiers innocent too?
(I'm very irritated to see him asking questions to which he knows the answers perfectly well.)

Then, in closing:
"By every indication we have, the population of Baghdad was making a secret holiday in its heart as those horrible palaces went up in smoke, and this holiday will soon be a public holiday, and if we all keep our nerve we can join the festivities with a fairly clear conscience."

Hitchens has somehow managed to imbed a journalist into the hearts of Baghdadians. Verrrrrrrry impressive. No wait, it's not because he's COMPLETELY MAKING THINGS UP. What are these indications? What freaked-out psychotherapy projection journalism affront is he committing here? Can you just say something now and have it suddenly be true? Maybe I need to watch CNN more for their "in depth coverage of besieged Iraqis' heart of hearts." Whatever. He better watch it or I'm going to have to find someone else to obsess over.