You’d think that people who make a living with words would make it a priority to understand what those words actually mean.
Andrew Sullivan, clearly wanting to engage with the “deranged”, has asked that I provide evidence that an attack was imminent, and therefore, as I argued, that torture to obtain information about the impending attack was necessary and legitimate. The entirety…
Is it just me, or is Mr. Sullivan’s strawman downright laughable? Of course, I expect that he will reject the evidence provided as unverified or unreliable. Or – and this is a serious point – he could argue that you can never prove that something was imminent if it ultimately didn’t happen. You see, even the actual airline tickets are not proof that something would have happened. Who knows, right? I mean, those tickets could have been intended to enable a meeting with an al Qaeda operative in the United States, or perhaps a meeting with Mike Wallace.
Those in the know, of course, understand that these so-called “tickets” are the product of a Bush-driven CIA conspiracy to imprison innocent Muslim men between the ages of 17 and 40. Just ask the DU. They’ll tell you.