"By this time, in a burst of healthy paranoia, we had destroyed all our copies of the Document, and the government wouldn't give us access to the copy held in the SCIF."

What is the reasoning behind destroying your client's evidence? What does "healthy paranoia" mean? If your case was predicated on this piece of evidence, why would you destroy copies of it? Were you afraid of prosecution or worse?

There is another blatantly false meme working its way through both the right and the left, and that is "Iraq is the bad war, and Afghanistan is the good war that we've been neglecting." This is a fringe position embraced as conventional wisdom by both the left and the right.

Thank you Mr.Fazel. Good answer. I'm tired of this endless habit of American politics embracing the most simplistic stereotypical cutouts of foreigners and foreign nations. When it comes to foreign policy, we are like 3rd graders. This childish mentality goes all the way to the top of our political spectrum. Evil? Is it even possible we use this term in contemporary discourse? Evil? Monsters? WTF? Grow up.

I'm not big on Pakistan or Iran having nuclear weapons. We have them and we are the only nation dumb enough to have used them. We dropped them on civilian cities full of women and children. We Americans are told in school that we had to drop them in order to force the speedy end of the war. Bullshit. The Japanese military was finished, and the leadership had already overtured surrender at the time we dropped the bombs. We wanted to flex our muscles for the Soviet Union, because the cold war had already started. Dropping bombs on civilians as a show of force to a perceived future enemy... maybe we should be using terms like evil after all.

His shift to the "center" has left him without a platform, or conviction. I'd rather he be damned for trying. I think this country would be interested in someone with backbone and a truthful approach to our interests. We've tasted the "tell us the bullshit we want to hear," and found it bitter. If all presidential candidates capitulate on all issues of empire, global economy, border autonomy, security, etc... in order to appeal to a middle class lacking in conviction, we will get the government we deserve. Asking the center to decide the fate of our troops in Iraq is not leadership. Leadership is taking a position, action, and dealing with the consequences. We should prime the public for this simple concept: extrication from a theater of war, is not safe. War and safe should not be in the same sentence, and should not occupy the same space in people's minds. "Extraction" and "necessary" should be the words drilled into people's consciousness.

Slavery has been around since the time of Jesus as well. Doesn't mean it worked to benefit humankind, or was morally correct. The idea that futures speculation smooths out markets is fine... until a crash or a depression brought about by that speculation. When nobody has a job or income, things are very smooth indeed. Ever been to a horse race track? Willing to base the world's economy on the model of off track betting?

If we put our existence in the hands of a system, then the system will control our lives. It is no different than placing your fate in the hands of a religious institution, or a authoritarian government. When a humane doesn't have input, the results are inhumane. Darwinian techno meme of "free" markets is devoid of morality and humanity. That was Jesus' point then, his point is valid now.

Robert McNamara, a chief architect of the Vietnam war, was guilty of treating war like a numbers game. It is our duty to invoke the proper numbers to express the true results of war. You have stated that approximately 1.5 million Vietnamese died during the conflict. In actuality 3.5 million Vietnamese died, 1.6 being military and the rest civilian on both sides. You can also add 2 million Cambodians, and .25 million Laotians and Thais killed as a result of the conflict. Therefore you are off by a very large number. I understand that once the numbers get this large, there is little difference in the impact of these numbers.

I believe that we need to hammer home the realities of war. If John McCain is confused to the realities of the war he actually server in it is because collectively we do not teach the realities of war, success or failure. We do not express clearly just what are our "American interests" overseas. And most importantly we do not help our own people understand that when we commit our troops to a conflict, that it is rarely a case of soldier vs. soldier and the reality is that for every 10 deaths in a war, 9 of them are innocent civilians.

Ask your average American citizen why we engaged in WWII, and they will state it was because the Japanese attacked us at Pearl Harbor. Then ask them why the Japanese attacked us, and listen to the birds chirp. This was a world wide conflict and we still don't have a clue.

Articles about trans-gendered people should include more information about the roots of their biological situation. Due a massive increase in fertility stimulating drugs, there has been a large increase in the inception of trans-gendered people. These fertility drugs are also the cause of explosion of multiple births (as exemplified in the TV show John and Kate plus 8.) If we have drugs that cause severe abnormalities like flipper arms in babies, we call it a hazard (Thalidamide) and ban the drug. If we have drugs that cause women to have 6 kids at a time, or to birth trans-gendered babies... we make movies and write articles about how we need to be more accepting of this underclass?