No. I said exactly what I said, and nothing else. I don't deem something acceptable unless it results in a net good. Which, when it comes to atrocities, is a very rare thing. I'm speaking of extremely specific circumstances, as opposed to something that can be general enough to fall within a particular philosophy. Its very much a case by case, and hangnails simply don't apply to my thinking.
Utilitarianism is easily dismissed because it basically throws out any attempt at humanistic justice in favor of a Vulcan-esque obedience to calculation. Works well in a lot of situations, but usually not workable, IMO at least, when it comes to moralistic stuff.