but he isn't a priority at the moment unless of course, he goes to Iraq.

A drunk was crawling about on the sidewalk under a lamppost at night.

A Police Officer came up to him and inquired, "What are you doing?"

The drunk replied, "I'm looking for my car keys."

The Officer looked around in the lamplight, then asked the drunk, "I don't see any car keys. Are you sure you lost them here?"

The drunk replied, "No, I lost them over there", and pointed to an area of the sidewalk deep in shadow.

The policeman then asked, "Well, if you lost them over there, why are you looking over here?"

The drunk looked at him and said, "Because the light is better over here."

Why look for the any actual terrorsists when there's a whole country full of people who look just like them instead.

After all, people like shooter are too stupid to know the difference anyway. AND they're proud of the fact! Go figure.

It certainly was, but he isn't a priority at the moment unless of course, he goes to Iraq.

Here we see the troll clearly on record that killing Iraqis is more important than bringing terrorists to justice. He is proudly ignorant of the difference between an Iraqi and a terrorist. He is now trying to pretend that we he says doesn't matter because it doesn't necessarily reflect what he thinks.

Which works for me as a good working definition of a liar.

Here's a hint. He's not in Iraq.

Pakistan's a much better bet.

But we pulled our intelligence assets out because the light was better elsewhere. That and blowing shit up plays better to the moron base. Present company included.

I'd be interested to discover what propoganda arm Al Qaeda is operating in the US, but this being a troll-idiot I can already tell that the forthcoming answer is the New Yorker and Time magazines.

Again you step boldly into the mire. Anyone who uses the phrase "Al Qaeda types" in a sentence has already given away the game in that his problem is with Muslims generally and has is not confined to those who actively wish to harm us. That he would refer to "propoganda" when its clear that we Americans are subjected to news coverage that would make Pravda green with envy over purity of message likewise leads me to conclude that he-who-is-too-cowardly-to-choose-a-name is also to divorced from reality to be susceptible to reason.

the government abuses its monopoly on legal force and violence, I would agree. When you say that it must do so, is compelled by its very nature to do so, I would definitely disagree.

I always find it useful to remeber that the word "goverment" itself is an abstraction instituted by men. Interestingly enough ours was designed specifically so that it wouldn't have a monopoly on the use of force. Needless to say the second amendment is poorly understood nowadays; a well armed citizenry and a lack of a standing army have all gone the way of the buggy whip. As has bucky1's vision of a minimalist state.

If we survive another 500 years, and still resemble humans, I certainly hope that we have vastly improved over our best current forms of democracy and economic participation.

Exactly backwards. We'll have to vastly improve democracy and economic participation in order to survive 500 years and resemble humans. I nevertheless predict that people will still be fighting over who's omnipotent invisible friend is the most omnipotent and the least invisible.

that all people are created equal, but that not all ideas share the same privilege then the correct position on most issues will leap out. The widening of voting rights has a simple logic that aguments in favor of disenfranchisment don't share.

The greatest danger we face currently is when logic and rationality itself comes under assault.

That the same shooter who's so unconcerned with the respect due to the detainee's faith, is the one who thinks the reason we need to be battling Muslims in the first place is because they want to force us to adapt their faith and pray facing Mecca.

So what's apparently worth killing over nevertheless isn't even worthy of complaint when the roles are reversed.

Typical.

Remember, the more pungent the previous evenings thread, the better the subsequent post.

Research takes time. (let alone book-hawking duties.)

would ignore the fact that a number of Blogs do original reporting. What they also ignore is that those blogs that don't do original reporting nevertheless LINK! They also know that anyone with half a brain who reads blogs is capable of following links or googling and actually check out the veracity of any claims found in the text of an article. (I'm particularly careful to check things out that I want to be true but am not sure of.)

Ironically, the most viscious blogger/MSM dustups have been over the MSM's inabilty or unwillingness to self-correct when wrong, something which comes quite naturally to bloggers.

Speaking of links:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deborah_Howell

Actually the only journalists who need worry excessively about blogs are the dishonest ones (We all know who are favorites are)

Of course by the mechanism of self-selection, that means that those who are the most vocal blog-critics also are uncoincidentally the biggest hacks. I don't think Sy Hersch has ever said anything bad about the blogosphere, has he?