V.E. Hanson nails it again with this perceptive analysis of the barrel of monkeys we call the "press":

In general, the media has now gone from the hysteria of the Armageddon of Afghanistan to the quagmire of Iraq to the looting in Baghdad — the only constant is slanted coverage, mistaken analysis, and the absence of any contriteness about being in error and in error in such a manner that reflected so poorly upon themselves and damaged the country at large at a time of war. It is as if only further bad news could serve as a sort of catharsis that might at least cleanse them of any unease about being so wrong so predictably and so often.

I myself had remarked to Ellen a few days ago that the looting wasn't what was remarkable... that sort of thing has happened to a conquered city since there have been cities to conquer. It was that the looting was being performed by the citizens of the city itself, not the army, that was probably unique in history.

Want to know what a real looting is like? Read The Rape of Nanking, a book about a place where soldiers were taught how to use bayonets by practicing on civilians, women were raped to death by the thousands, and entire blocks of the city were burned by roving bands of infantrymen.

Anyone who thinks the US is guilty of atrocities in this Iraq war, that we had no business there and the people of Iraq will quite obviously never benefit from it, is at best exhibiting a particularly loathsome form of ignorance, to the point of actually being a moron. That such things can come from the mouths of people who make their living pretending to be other people does not surprise me. That such things come out of the mouths of college graduates holding advance degrees, who are actually responsible for teaching our youth, sickens me.

Via on the third hand.