• I knew what was coming when Asher Steinberg challenged Glenn's Serious assertion; it was only a matter of time.

And I wanted to beam into the exchange, like a bit player coming on-screen in a classic Hollywood film noir, rushing up to Glenn and sobbing, "Glenn! Glenn! Stop it! Stop it! He's dead! Can't you see? He's dead!"

Then a close-up of Glenn's face, the narrowed slits of his eyes relaxing through the curls and wisps of smoke from the barrel of his emptied gun...

That's Entertainment!

• Until I read the context, I guessed that Maverick of the Living Dead simply meant to say "al Qaeda" and "Hamas" popped out by mistake. In Wingnut Speech, they're all synonymous euphemisms for "Evil Sand Nigger", after all.

Incidentally, of all of the multifarious atrocities and wrongdoing perpetrated by this maladministration, one would think that the open repudiation and undermining of the Palestinians' democratically-elected government would serve to universally put the lie to Amerika's pretensions to worshipping democracy.

I presume that outside the belly of the beast, the world generally sees such egregious, heinous hypocrisy for what it is.

But I was amused by Maverick LD dragging "Danny Ortega"'s name into the mix; I guess Nicaragua is part of the Axis of Evil. Who knew? But when one is trolling for wingnuts, no button is too dusty or obsolete to push.

I'll bet that somewhere on the Straight Talk Express, Maverick LD still has his "Ayatollah Assahola" T-shirt.

Home from work, and catching up on the comments:

Bravo! Kudos! Hallelujiah! Amen!

PS: I haven't a scintilla of interest in looking a gift Glenn in the mouth regarding the contrast between his incisive and lucid writing and most of what else is on Salon.

But I do have to say that every time I see Ms. Walsh's goofy-grinning caricature, the somber opening piano riff to "Ballad of a Thin Man" plays in my head.

I would like to rise in defense of Fred Hiatt and his imperialistic warmongering (which incorporates war-cheerleading) cohort, and commend them for their ability to learn from egregious mistakes and misjudgements, and to improve, refine, and otherwise evolve their intellectual and ethical understanding of foreign policy issues.

But I'll never be able to do that if Hiatt keeps publishing this vile and absurd dreck.

His editorial views dribble forth like maggots from the orifices of decaying monsters. Even after All We Now Know, Hiatt remains righteously wedded to the precept that "we had to destroy this village in order to save it", mixed with the ruthless and genocidal hypocrisy practiced by the government and military authorities of the Reich of Zion which rules the state and people of Israel: the systematic and intentional commission of terroristic atrocities by state military forces, beneath the brittle and crumbling rhetorical fig leaves justifying such acts as legitimate defense to unprovoked violent aggression, or simply Merry Mixups worthy of a perfunctory and vacuous "apology", or insidious pretense of "regret".

The Ugly Amerikans are still in charge, political misfeasors and sycophantic apologists alike.

To repeat a tragic and dismal observation: one of the many pernicious effects of militarism and warmongery is that it pulls, or chews, on the seams and borders of law, order, and human decency like the storied fox cub inside the Spartan lad's tunic gnawed the boy's vitals.

There are so many clichéd metaphors to be invoked, e.g. the "slippery slope"! But I believe it is fair to generalize that the Sweat of War leaches out, and depletes, our highest ideals and standards of civilized social intercourse.

In the delirium of war fever, one can't scruple to rigorously and precisely detail the exact circumstances and consequences of military operations. The sanitary, anaesthetic patch called "Collateral Damage" is one-size-fits-all, and covers the territory. Niggling questions such as who exactly suffered and died are too trivial and inconsequential to venture, and "impossible" to determine. (Did you see how that turns into a circle there at the end?)

So shut up about this-- I mean, that's the essence of any official response to expressed concerns or criticisms. Don't you know there's a war on? Furthermore, warmongers see themselves as exclusively giving account, creating those "new realities", and imposing faits accomplis upon a hapless citizenry; being taken to account is way off the radar. First things first.

In lizard-brain warrior proto-thinking, trying to draw clear and consistent battlefield distinctions, ultimately trickling down to micro-command & control of combat operations, is fatally stupid. From the warrior's perspective, it's insane hand-wringing-- or the equivalent of stopping to check one's gig line when taking fire. Shoot first; ask questions later!

The reprehensible propensity to cry havoc! and let loose the dogs of war is also reprehensibly manifest in the oxymoronic application of "military justice" as a revolving-door for combatants who commit war crimes and atrocities. (And cops who do the equivalent-- but that's another outrage.)

There's a pro forma process riddled with exculpatory subroutines, from lack of rigorous initial reporting and investigation, ubiquitous mendacity and deceit in the chain of command, and a consequent deficiency of competent evidence to build a compelling case-- given that the bar is raised higher, and wrapped in the barbed-wire of an egregiously sympathetic tryer-of-fact, whether judge or jury.

I wish I could think of a cheerer-upper to rescue this tenebrous rumination, but failing that, I might as well note that I believe that our Ruling Class of political, military, and financial elites act on the assumption that "conscience" is too valuable and tender a thing to lavish on the dirty work that Good Men must do in the name of virtue, and that it must perforce be sensibly switched off until things are properly sorted out.

As Thomas Jefferson, I think, once said: "It takes a hell of a lot of broken eggs to make a Freedom Omelet."