When there was talk of invading Iraq most Americans and citizens of the world were against it but that Administration with the help of congress went against the people and citizens of the world . Now if we make enough noise this Administration will listen .

Forget all the high-blown idealism Greenwald wallows in. I want to see more of those photos because I get a kick out of looking at evil deeds. In fact, I celebrate images of evil, particularly when they demonstrate that the good guys are really the bad guys.

All American soldiers should be lumped together by these photos and labeled as the bad guys. Sure, only a handful of them did the evil deeds shown in the photos, but they all wear the same uniform and they're all fighting evil wars that an evil president started, so they're all evil. To be sure, I side with their enemies on this one.

So let's celebrate evil and release those photos immediately! After all, isn't this really the end that truth serves?

What I find interesting about your screed against me is that nowhere did you actually outline what my way is--I'm fairly certain that you have no idea what I've advocated here, or what way forward I've supported. - omooex

This is why I don't bother with you anymore. Why would I? It is literally a waste of time. Everyone who bothers to read your blathering knows what your way is. It can be summed up in one word: Incrementalism. It is a LOSER and everyone with a functioning brain knows it.

My way can be summed up in two words: Direct Action. It is Chomsky's way. It is Zinn's way. It is a winner. You mention how brilliant Chomsky is and yet you are to stupid to hear him.

You are a loser o'fer. You choose to lose. You probably always have and probably always will.

So in the name of Fighting the Terrorists, we're going to vest greater secrecy powers in the President and abandon our long-standing legal framework to enable concealment of this information.

If that isn't the very definition of "letting the terrorists win" I don't know what is. If the "greatest country in the world" is so willing to give up its true distinction as a free and open society, there is no question that we have been terrorized into submission. I loathe the sheeple who continue to wallow in fear, and Obama must hear from the rest of us that we do not accept this continuation of Bush insanity. Even if he refuses to enforce an "accountability moment" on the architects and enablers of our decline, we will hold him accountable for jettisoning his core campaign promises.

What I find interesting about your screed against me is that nowhere did you actually outline what my way is--I'm fairly certain that you have no idea what I've advocated here, or what way forward I've supported. The main reason is that you don't read anything you find here, unless you want to use it as a segway to excerpt some former post of yours which you think predicted it all.

I hate to break it to you, Adnoying, but the major difference between you and Chomsky--besides a huge gulf in the brains department--is that his output consists of hundreds [if not thousands] of books and articles and speeches. He is passionate about his beliefs and it shows. He works towards making his views known, and towards enlightening people who do not agree with them or understand them. You're just a troll.

If you want to refute this, please start by listing the actual world activities you've been involved in over the years to prove that your money is where your mouth is. From what I can tell, your sole political activity is to log on here and complain that anyone doing anything is committing a crime against humanity. I've offered to show mine, you've never had any interest.

In fact, whatever happened to your tax resistance? I recall you logging on here and bragging how you were the most principled person in the world because of it for several weeks this year? Any examples you care to share with nascent followers?

accountable. I do not think it means what you think it means.

You've missed Ad-annoying's only point, the only point he ever makes or cares about. He saw it all coming, his stance was the most moral, he is the only one who knows the way forward. And he's keeping it a secret. -- o'fer

I did see it coming but that is far from my "only point." More moral? More principled and intelligent certainly but I am not sure what morality has to do with it. I am not the only one who knows the way forward and it is not a secret. That is unless you would accuse Chomsky and Zinn of "secrecy" too. Do you think they are also ego driven narcissists? Our problem is people like you o'fer. You are always wrong and always bitter that someone else was/is correct. So, you attempt to demean those who were/are correct in order to feel better about yourself. I, on the other hand, don't need to demean you. I do do it occasionally because others need to realize that you and yours are not to be listened to. Your way is the wrong way. It is once again being proven as such. If you had an honest bone in your body and cared about the future you would just shut your mouth and listen to those who have been correct all along. It's not my ego, such as it is, that is the problem you see. It's yours.

We already now know that torture took place and we have had the accountability of our governors in both 2006 and more strongly in 2008.

You call that 'accountability' for criminal acts? Would this work in any other kind of job?

"Accountability" referred to Greenwald's point that FOIA was enacted to ensure, per the Supreme Court, that the "governors" were "accountable to the governed."

My response was that the "governors" have already been held accountable at the ballot box in 2006 and 2008.

FOIA has nothing to do with legal accountability, and thus my question -- what does the release of 2000 pictures of additional torture acts done by the Bush Administration tell us that we didn't already know?

Lets appoint an Independent Prosecutor. But whether or not these pics get released into the public, while it may be to the letter of FOIA, does not make "accountability" at the ballot box a compelling argument, since we're past that point.