If you click the picture, you should be able to go to the GG column over at Salon discussing some of the "kill kill kill" sentiments of neoconservatives. The picture was added (credit given there) to underline who this will affect (as in maim/kill/shift to hatred of the U.S.). This sort of thing should repeatedly be done, especially when discussing potential armed conflict or when demonizing a people. Surely, such faces can be used to argue for violence (visions of white faces to defend violence against Southern blacks), but putting a face to the people we as a nation helped kill in hundreds of thousands (in respect to Iraq, but also many other places) is useful.
This can be seen while touching on books and such, since I added a few new ones to the side panel. I was listening to one of Isabel Allende's autobiographies, which includes a discussion of the military take-over of Chile ... another "9/11" date of some significance. The take-over involved the murder of the democratically chosen leader, a relative of Allende. We supported this coup, since it fit our alleged national interest. Greenwald notes that we continue to hate democracy ... supporting the losers of the Palestinian election since we just didn't care for the winners. See also, Venezuela. Most nations are stuck with the results of 2000/2004 over here.
Isabel, who wrote such works as House of the Spirits, noted that many at the time felt military dictatorships were for other unfortunates. Can't happen here, they said. How we forget our role there. Christopher Hitchens wrote a brief against Kissinger in part dealing with those events. He later became a war hawk against Iraq, consistency not quite his strong suit on that matter. Anyway, maybe a few pictures of those rotting in Gitmo or tortured (or whatever euphemism is used) with the (Supreme Court forced) procedures given leaving a lot to be desired ... so says people with uniforms, a bit harder to sneer at than "the left" etc.
I referenced the first book on the list, which I just finished this morning -- a good read on that much maligned bird, the pigeon. My only criticism would be that it didn't touch upon mating, a bit peculiar since it dealt with various issues, though focusing on racing and shows. [The author was drawn into the matter via a discussion with someone who knew a person who raced them. I too knew someone who did as well -- the field therefore was familiar.] Pictures are also valuable when it comes to animals, including when you are in the animal welfare business. As with war, though I don't allege equity between the two subjects here, some rather not see some of them.
I do find a connection to both groups, just of somewhat different varieties. Thus, the "let's allow them to kill them, not us" is horrific to me, when "them" are simply people just like you and me, just of a different nationality. As GG says, on some level, it is the thought process of a sociopath. Likewise, on some level many consider animals not as mere things, but "persons" of some sort. The fact they are not very consistent about it might be unsurprising, but it doesn't seem to me very ideal. And, yes, I sometimes have images in my mind of the beings affected in both cases. Perils of reading and forming a vision of what I'm reading, perhaps.
On that general subject, I think one need not be a vegetarian to respect the ethics of treatment of animals, as well as diet in particular. Peter Singer, famed for Animal Liberation, co-wrote a book on the latter subject and underlines it is not necessarily and all or nothing matter -- useful given the realities of the day.* For instance, there are many ways to improve the treatment of animals raised for food. Also, the animal is not the only thing at issue here. Factory farming, for instance, has many negative effects for humans as well. One can point out the environmental ones alone, and the book underlines the hidden costs of let's say cheap factory produced chicken.
As with oil, such costs deserve to be widely known, even if we ultimately decide they are acceptable (many do not). Relatedly, a farm bill is currently in the works, and the NYT today noted there are new rules for vitamins. Lots of stuff to fill the airwaves really, they need not be limited to the occasional PBS special.
---
* The article notes the book addresses Michael Pollan's thoughts on vegetarianism as well as underlines that Peter Singer is not just some idealist without a sense of practical reality. His sentiment that those mostly good should be honored, not denounced as hypocrites for being human, has applications to many situations.