I'm with Pat Buchanan on this one, although he doesn't go far enough. He doesn't address the propaganda campaign against the Gaddafi loyalists anywhere near as strongly as he should have.
I've felt this way from the beginning of this fiasco. Supporters of the rebels (and their media cheerleaders) were trying too hard to demonize the loyalists. I'm not saying Gaddafi isn't a bad guy, but we can't say for sure those seeking to overthrow him aren't just as bad. I wondered early on if Gaddafi had a lot more support than the media was giving him? After all, it seemed to me he couldn't have done as well as he has if the whole country was against him.
I'm not sure I can think of one instance of anti- loyalist propaganda that's been confirmed to be true and I feel safe in assuming the recent story about loyalist snipers targeting children is akin to the Iraq War stories of baby incubators being thrown out in the streets of Kuwait.
I'm still thinking we may be backing the wrong horse, assuming we should be involved in this mess at all. The one question I have left is one I saw in the comments to a Yahoo News story on Libya : Who will protect the loyalists from massacre should the rebels' fortunes change and they win?