The fantasy that before 2002 we had more validity is categorically disproven by the events of 9/11.

9/11 occurred in 2001, which disproved nothing. The events of 2002 merely disproved the 'myth' that the Bush Administration was serious about combatting 'terrorism' in the first place.

Unbelievably, tiberius does make a legitimate point that thuggish behavior was no less common to US foreign policy than it was to other countries throughout history. Sadly, he appears to think it was always the rule (as it has been since about 2002) rather than the exception (which was more the case prior to then).

Give the lad points for trying though.

nabalzbbfr: I am sure they are kept in very comfortable circumstances, so there is no reason for liberal bleeding hearts to commiserate about their conditions.

This is a joke surely? No-one could seriously believe this tripe, right?

I should have also pointed out that not only are we NOT harming these children, but we are also purging their young minds of the poisonous venom their misguided parents reared them on.

And you base this upon...what? What are your sources? How do they know what is happening inside these black sites? What are their philosophical and political leanings?

Come to that, what are your own moral and ethical leanings? Oh, that's right. You have none.

Why can't kidnapped American citizens get as much coverage on Salon as enemies of the USA.

Source your claim, then you'll earn a serious response.

Is there any limit to Greenwald's determination to create a geo-strategic and economic catastrophe for America?

You meant to say "George W Bush", I'm sure. After all, it is his policies that have already created the very geo-strategic and economic catastrophe you outline.

Libby's alleged "perjury" victimized no one.

Tell us, o Elephantman: precisely when did little things like "the rule of law" and "trial by jury" cease to have any meaning to you?

Can I presume then, that you are hot on the trail of those criminals that leaked national defense secrets, multiple occassions to the NY Times? No? Gosh, what a surprise!

Given the program was itself illegal, and "national defense" has yet to be shown as having been compromised in any shape by bringing this illegal activity to light?

I realize I'm wasting my time treating you with any level dignity, but still some things you simply shouldn't be allowed to get away with.

That alone is more substance, than you are offering with this gratuitous insult.

You've earned nothing else, shooter242: the back of our collective hand and a knee to your groin.

Nothing else.

As for "Iokahave fallen and can't get out of the well", he's on permanent ignore for having nothing but bile to offer.

Out of curiousity, was this before or after I called you out on insulting my wife (a first responder with FDNY), or when I pointed out your cowardice in the face of the modern world? I mean what kind of man is still cowering under his bed over "9/11" six years after the fact, while those of us who were in direct proximity to the attack have simply gotten on with their lives?

In any case, do acquaint yourself with the character I take my handle from. Perhaps you'll appreciate the underlying point, Herod.

No loss, certainly.

Neither would you removal from the living, but honestly I don't care one way or the other.

no attacks in the U.S.

Nor were there any throughout the 1950s, or 1960s, or 1970s, or 1980s, or the majority of the 1990s.

Your point is meaningless to the point of irrelevance.

I haven't had any of my rights stamped on and won't, unless I decide to sit at home with my wife and kids and plan violent acts against the USA and its citizens.

Actually you have. You just haven't been targeted for arrest and rendition yet. Personally, I hope you never have to go through that.

Personally, I fear you will at some point.

Are you advocating that we allow ourselves to be dominated an controlled?

Too late. You already are, as demonstrated by your persistent lack of critical commentary.

Or do you think if we play nice, everyone else will too?

Oh that was disproven way back in 1941. The question is whether action taken in response to others will make things better or worse.

What do you think about the idea that if one shows weakness it invites attack?

An irrelevant point and false dichotomy, given aggression occurs whether one shows weakness or strength. After all, 9/11 occurred despite the perponderance of military strength the US could show, just as the Iraq insurgency has continued unabated despite the rhetorical posturing of President Bush.

Although one could easily make the argument you yourself are inviting attack with these intellectually weak and morally bankrupt comments of yours. If that's the case, I'd recommend sell yourself as a slave to a dom; its less embarrassing.

How much you want to bet these guys sit around beating off to Leni Riefenstal movies?

Too 'artsy' for real men like them. Ditto with "Why We Fight".

More likely they prefer the modern classics liks "Hostel", "Turistas", "Captivity", and "Saw".

You know: unredeemable and pointless violence, murder and mutilation. Basically their entire worldview writ small.

I mean real reality not blogger reality where whatever you imagine not only happened already but it's probably a genocide at the hands of some white guys and Jews, we haven't invaded Iran contrary to the last eleventy zillion reports that we, apparently have.

A fair comment...at least I think it is...if he's merely reiterating the...an underlying point about...

Actually, I have no idea what he's trying to say. Can someone translate for me?