That’s exactly what acting Justice Secretary Raul Gonzales did, as is his wont whenever he and his boss in Malacañang find themselves with their backs against the wall.

Gonzales called United Nations special rapporteur Philip Alston a "muchacho" and "brainwashed." (Good heavens, when did anyone find the time to brainwash him?)

Alston, who was here for ten days to look into the numerous extrajudicial killings that have taken place in the country since Ms. Gloria M. Arroyo began squatting in Malacañang, said that the number of extrajudicial killings in the Philippines is "distressing" and that Ms. Arroyo should persuade the Armed Forces to "acknowledge" and conduct a "genuine" investigation of the killings.

There were killings. What’s wrong with simply acknowledging that and conducting a genuine investigation? After all, the government itself says that the investigation is still incomplete. There, the matter could have rested, at least for the time being, without having to resort to name-calling.

***

The Melo Commission report, which was unnecessarily withheld from the public for a spell thus raising all kinds of suspicions, says among others that Ms. Arroyo may be held liable under international law if the killings remain unresolved and unabated.

Logic 101 says that if some of the killings were indeed perpetrated by the military establishment, then she would be accountable under the principle of command responsibility. She is, after all, supposedly the commander-in-chief of the armed forces.

But, of course, that goes only as far as logic. The P64 question is whether the killings will ever be solved. Since the military indeed seems to be in denial, as claimed by UN special rapporteur Alston, that might as well be a P64 million question.

***

Incidentally, I have not read or heard of any statement emanating from the either Washington or the US Embassy in Manila about the extrajudicial killings and the Melo Commission Report. I find that rather curious.

Americans are usually quick to slam violations of human rights in countries other than their own. Take for instance their instantaneous denouncement of the expulsion by Cuba of foreign journalists last week.

Here, journalists are killed and not a peep from the US government. Why?

***

If there is anyone who really appears to be in denial, it is US President George W. Bush. He refuses to accept the fact that the US has effectively lost the war he has been waging in Iraq when the majority of the American people decided they want no more of it.

What does he do instead? He decides to send in more US troops to Iraq , purportedly for the ultimate purpose of eventually withdrawing from that already war-ravaged country at the soonest possible time. Talk about an oxymoron.

Sending in 21,500 more US troops to Iraq will definitely not hasten US withdrawal. If that figure were 215,000, then it might. That, of course, is out of the question, considering how thinly spread American forces already are.

And it is unlikely the US will be able to persuade its allies in the so-called Coalition of the Willing, many of whom have earlier withdrawn troops sent to Iraq, to contribute more.

In fact, even Bush’s staunchest supporter in the Iraq adventure, Prime Minister Tony Blair of the United Kingdom, has just decided to withdraw a substantial number of British troops within the year. It was a decision based undoubtedly on his attempt to prevent a defeat for his party in the next parliamentary election. Public opinion in the UK is pervasively one of disengagement from the Iraq debacle.

Compounding Bush’s travails is the decision of Denmark to withdraw its small contingent of 450 troops and of Lithuania and Latvia , respectively, to reduce their even smaller contribution to the Iraq war effort.

***

US Vice President Dick Cheney said in Canberra that it would be a serious mistake to allow Iran to become a nuclear power.

It was not a mistake to allow India or Pakistan or indeed, even North Korea ?

Cheney is now visiting close allies to rally support for the impending debate in the UN Security Council where the US is expected to submit a draft resolution imposing additional sanctions against Iran.

The Security Council last December banned transfer of technology and expertise to Iran’s nuclear program and gave Tehran 60 days to comply with earlier demands to freeze its enrichment program. The 60-day deadline has passed.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, in the meantime, insisted that his country will go ahead with its nuclear program as it its right.

At the same time, Ahmadinejad called on Western and other powers to stop their enrichment programs if they wanted Iran to stop its own and return to negotiations.

"Justice demands that those who want to hold talks with us shut down their nuclear fuel cycle program too. Then, we can hold dialogue under a fair atmosphere," he said.

Who can argue with that?