Here we go again. Yes, the apparent abuse of Iraqi prisoners by British troops was wrong. Yes, the alleged abusers should be punished severely. But for heaven's sake -- the suggestion flowing through today's hysterical media stories that this apparent abuse by a tiny handful of soldiers somehow destroys the case for the war in Iraq, or the case for democracy in Iraq, or the moral superiority of the coalition over Saddam Hussein, is as obscene as it is ridiculous. On the Today programme (0708) this morning (where else?) Abdel Bari Atwan, editor of Al Quds newspaper, was given free and respectful rein to rant on about how this would destroy the reputation of the British troops in Iraq and the wider Arab world. With Iraqis geting blown up by Arab terrorists but with the British garrisoned areas relatively peaceful, with Iraqi memories still fresh of the real torture and murder perpetrated against them by Saddam's regime, and with the country desperately eager to grasp the opportunity of freedom and prosperity made possible only by the coalition, this was plainly ridiculous. Yet Bari Atwan was not challenged.

The point is surely that, while there are rogue elements in every country's military, the test is whether they are dealt with; and the point about these abuses is that they are being dealt with, in public and with full accountability. That is the difference between a democracy and a tyranny. Was this obvious point put to Abdel Bari Atwan? Of course not. Thus the BBC was once again complicit in the real message to the Arab world -- that in the war against the west, the British media is an important player.