I was greatly offended by Alyssa Rubin's statement that Iraqi's "are used" and inurred to the vicious violence they are exposed to or threatened by on a daily basis since the American invasion. As she represents the NY Times this implies that she and her paper endorse the ethically bankrupt fantasy/doctrine of collateral damage or what used to be called in Northern Ireland by the British as 'acceptable levels of violence" which always applies to others and never to Americans. How can she speak for Iraqis on this violence?. On what basis can she assess or speak for the long term consequences of daily terror and sectarian violence precipitated by American "regime change" from personal trauma, mental illness, vigilante culture to potential sectarian civil war. The fact that your anchors let this comment pass without challenge or question indicates their lack of critical journalistic perspective which may be attributed to the fact that the NY Times is one of your program's sponsors.