I don't think D.B. is who you think they are. The "D.B" who called for "troops out of Haiti now!" when they were administering aid writes on this website under his full name (David Broder) and also has a "troops out now/stop the intervention now" position on Libya, unlike the D.B. above.
I think it's pretty clear that there has been no "silence" about NATO motives in our coverage, but it's certainly true that the emphasis has been elsewhere. That's because we're a small organisation active on a small left. In our articles about Libya we're trying to intervene in and shape a debate on the far-left of the labour movement. Within that debate, everyone involved knows that western imperialism is bad and has nefarious motives. The contentious issue is whether it is necessary to actively oppose everything western imperialism does even if a given action has a (perhaps limited, temporary or unstable) positive outcome or side-effect. Therefore the emphasis of our coverage has been on that aspect. Maybe you think that emphasis is wrong and that we should be writing our paper differently; that's a legitimate argument, but I don't think it's fair to imply that we're naive about NATO's motives.