And, while you're there, don't overlook the slide show.

http://www.tampabay.com/specials/2009/photo_galleries/guantanamo_bay/

Oh wow your paranoia high today. Opinionated maybe. Spy lol. Gee I don't think it would take much spying to read Salon. Yes I'm going to have you arrested for having an opinion right or wrong.

A euphemism:

But Smo interrupts: "There is no solitary confinement here. They just spend a lot of time alone in their cells."

http://www.tampabay.com/news/military/war/article1015673.ece

Oh but the GUESTs were journalist who were invited under the condition that they not blog or twit. So therefore it was RUDE and unethical for the journalists to blog or tweet at this event.

With that I agree.

I just think journalists shouldn't be guests. It's a journalist's job to be rude.

It's a journalist's job to be rude.

-- Paul Daniel Ash

Wow you won't get to far taking that attitude. I would not give an ounce of information to a rude journalist.

And sometimes it take lipsticks. Cosmetics are tools of the trade for whores.

((eyeroll))

I was obviously kidding about your being a spy or an idiot savant; however, that I am even having to tell you that is pretty lame.

"So here we have an Afghan citizen, not captured on any battlefield,"

Glenn Isn't Afghanistan a battlefield?

Did you ever see the musical "Oklahoma" where there's a song "The Cowboy and the Farmer Should be Friends?" Well, the Press and the WH should NOT be friends, they should be more like the farmer and the cowboy.

Well blow me down with a feather! I only went and thought of that very song myself when reading about the press and their relationship to the pols the other day when reading the Shepard posts.

Twenty years ago I was in a band called "The Vegetable Liberation Front", (I haven't changed. I'm still trying to liberate the dozy fuckers) and we decided to do "Eloise" in our set. We had only been doing it two weeks when The Dammed came out with their version of the same obscure and ancient track.

Great minds? Small minds? who knows but...Spooky

You might want to have this changed to clear up the confusion about which government "truths" you feel are appropriate to be discussed here.
__________________________

There! That wasn't so hard, was it?

See, here's the thing-- notice that below the title that you find so confusing and unhelpful are lots and lots of words in tinier print that attempt to clear up the mystery. One example:

(1) Note that Wakil was detained at Guantanamo for six years -- until April, 2008. That entire time, and especially into 2007 and 2008, government officials were assuring the public that all remaining Guantanamo prisoners were "the worst of the worst." That claim continues to be made.

Furthermore, if you click on the tiny words in blue, it will magically transport you to other sites that relate to Glenn's text.

Hope this clears up the confusion.

I wasn't engaging in the 9/11 truth debate. I was responding to Bernbart claiming Londonlad was wrong about the FBI saying they have no evidence linking Osama to 9/11. That is the truth. The FBI has publicly stated, as both my link and Londonlads link proved, they have no hard evidence linking Osama to the 9/11 attacks. Bernbart was wrong and I was correcting him. As you would do if someone made a factual error. I never said anything about 9/11 being an inside job or any other conspiracy theory claim. I was merely correcting someone who was wrong.

Considering Wakil's past support the Poppy growing Taliban, and the new U.S push in Afghanistan to destroy the poppy fields, they claim is supporting Al Quieda, he may be in trouble.

I also was just resonding into London lad, pointing out Osama Bin Laden sent tapes claiming responsibilbty for 9/11. Besides Londonlad has been accusing me of supporting issues I have never supported.

It is not. Utter fantasy from the movies.

One need not be disagreeable in order to disagree. One need not do anything as a journalist other that ferret out the truth, no matter how hard to get at, and then report it. One need not walk up to president Obama and call him an asshat in order to report the horrible "Bush-like" things that he has done.

I can not recall Glenn Greenwald being rude to Obama, but he sure has been a thorn in his side. (or his ass, whatever)

Remember, a dog wagging its tail as you approach may be the one that attacks you with all its might. A reporter that is always friendly with a pol might be the one to report gross hypocrisy when he sees the pol out with a young lady, not his wife.

And lastly, Glenn will honor an "off the record" request if made in advance; he just does not like to agree to them. I read Glenn say that an intern made an "off the record" agreement last week and Glenn honored that even though he would not have made the agreement. Glenn can be a class act; and yet a good reporter.

http://xkcd.com/386/

"Cosmetics are tools of the trade for whores."

Yikes. That's a pretty rash statement. A little flirting and lipstick never hurt, but that doe not make someone a whore.

Professionals, on the other hand, have been to J-school and have learned how to booze and shmooze on the 4th and then ask rough, tough questions on the 5th.

Fourth was a Saturday this year, and everyone knows that tough questions aren't asked (or answered) on Sundays...

For the record, I am not a 9/11 truther. I don't want anyone to get the wrong opinion of me. Thank you.

Wakil's past support the Poppy growing Taliban

"he was well-known as an anti-Taliban commander"

"a poppy-eradication program that Wakil had begun in Kunar"

English is really not your first language, is it dear? Is it even your second?

I wasn't engaging in the 9/11 truth debate. I was responding to Bernbart claiming Londonlad was wrong about the FBI saying they have no evidence linking Osama to 9/11. That is the truth. The FBI has publicly stated, as both my link and Londonlads link proved, they have no hard evidence linking Osama to the 9/11 attacks. Bernbart was wrong

And in spite of us correcting her on a point of fact and fact alone she is still at it.

I also was just resonding into London lad, pointing out Osama Bin Laden sent tapes claiming responsibilbty for 9/11.

Don't you understand that you lower the tone and calibre of debate if when your assertions have been comprehensibly refuted you still wilfully persist in stating falsehoods?