In a response to Ward Churchill's essay, someone wrote the following:
"Though most Americans would fiercely agree that ‘freedom of speech’ is one of the cornerstones of Human Rights, I find [Churchill's article] predisposed to take an Anti-American position from the first paragraph. I find no mention of the other groups, ethnic/religious/national, who have perpetrated crimes against others; such as the Japanese slaughter of millions of Chinese nationals, Chinese Communists against millions of its own citizens, Vietnamese government’s murder of hundreds of thousands of its own citizens, Cambodia’s ‘garden of skulls’, etc."
His essay was about American injustices, not the other injustices of the 20th century. Pretend Smith beats his wife. The police find out about it and come to arrest him. Smith knows that Jones beats his wife, too. When the police arrive, he says "But Jones beats his wife too!" I don't think so. That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Are the police being "Anti-Smith" because they found out about Smith and came to arrest him?