[Davros]

JD I can agree with your logic IF you make the substitution of the truth (war protests) for the fiction (human rights protests). I totally agree that if human rights is what the people had been marching against then it is total hypocrisy not to be also protesting human rights abuses in Iraq. But what you are arguing is that the paragraph makes perfect sense IF we accept this fiction. I instead ask why is the writer exposing us to the fiction? He wants to attack the marchers credibility becuase he has differing opinions, and in adopting the fiction he gave himself a strong basis of logic. To HALE with the truth - he threw that out in the first sentence.