After admitting to “Fox News Sunday”’s Chris Wallace that he had no basis for describing Donald Rumsfeld and Alberto Gonzales as “architects of torture,” Amnesty International’s U.S. chief, William Schulz, offered up the following astounding remark when asked if his organization’s comparison of Gitmo to the Gulag had hurt its reputation:

” Chris, I don’t think I’d be on this station, on this program today with you if Amnesty hadn’t said what it said and President Bush and his colleagues haven’t responded as they did. If I had come to you two weeks ago and said, ‘Chris, I’d like to go on FOX with you just to talk about U.S. detention policies at Guantanamo and elsewhere,’ I suspect you wouldn’t have given me an invitation.”

An astounded Wallace replied: “So you’re saying if you make irresponsible charges, that’s good for the cause?”

Schulz then backtracked quickly: “I don’t believe that they’re irresponsible,” he said. “I’ve told you the ways in which I think that there are analogies between the Soviet prison system and the United States. But the important point is — the important point is — and I should say first that we said ‘alleged architects of torture.’ That’s very important.”

Somehow, the word “alleged” just keeps getting left off when people report on Amnesty’s report. So let me try the same tack and call Amnesty International “the alleged self-righteous and intellectually disingenuous perpetrator of digusting moral equivalencies between the United States and the Soviet Union.”

As is true of Amnesty as well, you have my implicit permission to cut out the word “alleged” and just reprint the rest of that sentence, since that’s what I actually feel and believe.