I’d like to try to step back from the partisan issues of the day for a moment, and ask you if you would be so kind, Roger, as to help me try to understand the general sylogism you are presenting here. Let me know, if you will, if there’s anything I’m misunderstanding; I misunderstand many things, and I suspect I am doing so here.

The Kerry campaign, and many supporters,are acting “bizarre[ly]” in “dissing an ally during war.” Such behavior is “appalling” and “disgraceful.”

Do I have anything wrong so far?

Kerry and supporters have variously questioned Allawi’s credibily and honesty and impugned it. They have accused him of acting in a partisan fashion. They have critized him.

That is what is disgraceful and appalling. Such behavior in regard to a head of government in “alliance” with the U.S. government is disgraceful and appalling. It “undermines” our alliance.

How have you applied this general sylogism previously? Is it appalling and disgraceful to have spoken in such a way of our brave and valiant ally Ngo Dinh Diem? Nguyen Khanh? Doung Van Minh? Nguyen Cao Ky?

How about General de Gaulle? Francois Mitterrand? King Faisal? General Pinochet? Fulgencio Batista? Chiange Kai-shek? Ferdinand Marcos? Anastasio Somoza? Mohammed Reza Pahlevi? Park Chung Hee? General Suharto? Manuel Noriega? General Mussaraf?

Well, you get the idea. This is not an attempt to play “gotcha.” I’m genuinely trying to figure out what logical line you are drawing. Criticizing any or all of these leaders we were at one time allied with (argue about Mitterand not having been an ally in the Gulf War I if you like, but to be consistent, presumably we should tear up our treaties with France if we’re truly no longer allies) would have been wrong? Right? Some of them?

These cases differ from Mr. Allawi in what way?

I’m trying to understand when or how it’s “appalling” and “disgraceful” to criticize, question, or even rhetorically attack, an ally?