oh, wait, that was already tried, the "flowers" bit. didn't seem to work to well then, either.

But let's take a look at the facts.  Shall we?  You're far better acquainted with what the punditry caste has to offer than myself, I readily concede.  So taking a look at the record (that I'm quite sure will ring a bell):

Friedman called for Gitmo to be shut down midway through 2005:

Just Shut It Down - New York Times
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN. Published: May 27, 2005. London. Shut it down. Just shut it down. I am talking about the war-on-terrorism P.O.W. camp at Guantánamo...

Which indicates that he does not take the human rights violations committed there or elsewhere, sanctioned by U.S., lightly.  He's on the record repeatedly on this score and you're too keenly observant not to know this.  

You seem to willfully disregard the context in which his point is being made.  Friedman's arguing about U.S. soft power here, the so-called 'battle for the hearts and minds' that's not going too swell.  And likely he's a bit more well traveled and thus acutely aware of this reality than either you or I.  

He's also pointing out the pathetic, dispiriting and bitter irony of how insidiously stealth was the Rove electoral machine when it came to rolling over anyone (swift boating genuine war heroes, Cleland/Kerry/McCain, while never truly being held to account for Shrub's own personal milestones or lack thereof) on their way towards the brass ring, while being utterly ineffectual at combating our actual lethal adversaries (think, 'wanted dead or alive' - so much for the W. as sherriff) whether militarily or dimplomatically.  

Let's be honest about the demonstrable convictions of those we are arguing with, it tends to be a bit more substantive.  Wouldn't you agree?  Friedman's career demonstrates that he has had a lifelong interest in and commitment to the Mideast (unlike W., i.e. recalling Pakistan's Prez as 'the General' in the '99 pop quiz).  The Mideast theme is evident from Friedman's choice of bachelor's degree onward throughout the arc of his professional career.  And being the avid news junkie we all know you to be - you're well aware of this and that he's prone to pointing out the nihilism inherent in societal conditions on the Arab street that would glorify suicide bombing and the mass murder of civilians as the most illustrious distinction one can attain in this lifetime (the intentional grooming of a lad or lady towards a path to make Allah and dear old mom proud, etc.).  You know that this irks him enough that he routinely points it out.  How the atrocities are not being decried outright, vocally, but that there's a kind of resignation to it.  

And that we are all may be bearing witness to the makings of ethnic cleansing among rival Iraqi sectarian factions, if not the glowing embers of a full fledge genocide (that could become further inflamed regardless of what we do or don't do, at this point) is worthy of the occasional reference.  Is it not?  

"But Clinton did it too!"

"But Al Qaida did it too! And worse!"?

Setting the bar this low is an excellent way to trip over it, Thomas.

I'll give you six more months to figure that one out.