"Mohammed,

There's an insidious line of thinking infecting many people in the west. It's called moral equivalency. To those who practice this idiocy, bin Laden is to America as George Washington was to the British Empire. This keeps these people from labelling anyone "evil" because they could later be held in high esteem. It's sad to say, but I believe a lot of Muslims see bin Laden as their own George Washington. I don't know how to combat this. The only thing I can think of is to prove them wrong by our actions. That means building a strong, prosperous Iraq and then leaving. Unfortunately there is one political party in the US where all the moral equivalence morons hang out, and it's the one currently in charge of the purse strings.
-Kafir "

http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/2007/04/end-war-right-message-sent-to-wrong.html
[in comment section- about 20-30 comments from top]

I think Bin Ladin may be seen similar to Castro or for those completely lacking in even relatively recent history: Bin Ladin and Chavez.

According to wikipedia
"Moral equivalence" arose as a polemic term-of-retort to "moral relativism,"
And moral relativism:
"In philosophy, moral relativism is the position that moral or ethical propositions do not reflect objective and/or universal moral truths, but instead make claims relative to social, cultural, historical or personal circumstances. Moral relativists hold that no universal standard exists by which to assess an ethical proposition's truth. Relativistic positions often see moral values as applicable only within certain cultural boundaries or in the context of individual preferences. An extreme relativist position might suggest that judging the moral or ethical judgments or acts of another person or group has no meaning, though most relativists propound a more limited version of the theory."

But I think moral equivalence means more and is twisted by various elements in society's landscape. One important aspect is people's desire to make "things" equal and in order to make things equal there is need to force a change in the balance.
In this wonderland, there is no such thing as good or evil BUT getting rid of good and evil by leveling them is "naturally and obviously" a *GOOD* thing to do. This means that anyone pointing out something as evil is the person who is evil because "the program" or proper course is get to some place in which there is no good and evil and anyone pointing out anything evil is first promoting the idea that evil exists and of course working against "the program" of ignoring the evil with the hope of ridding the world of this difference [good and evil]. Or in other words seeing a difference is the only evil. It's sort of like, you shouldn't make fun of the guy who has red hair [obviously:)] and more important you should not even see red hair as even different or least, don't *say* anything about it that allows anyone think it is different.

So correctly naming something as evil is one few things that can be "real" evil [wrong, bad, naughty, and/or troublemaker]. The next part is adjusting the evil so it's good. This can be done by attacking good. A world in which Bush is Hitler is a more equal world. So the *good* task is degrading any that is thought to be "good" so it balances. You can also promote what is known to be evil by promoting it by favorably comparing it to what is thought by most to be good.

In summary, the only true good is Equality, therefore you deny there is "really" anything which can be called good or evil, but nevertheless promote evil and shun good in order to reach a paradise of world without good or evil. And therefore his wise course brings us a world in which not only has no war, but also no conflict of any kind- babies don't cry nor are people rude.