My neices used to call me “The Pharmacist” out of appreciation for my varied knowledge of psychotropics, but even I cannot find in my inventory the pill to cure the cognitive dissonance (pace Sal).that is making my head explode.

Glenn Greenwald’s latest must read, confronts us with the newest version of the face of evil, and (Holy Shit!) it’s Prez!. (supported by the usual supects).

33 Guantanamo detainees fought their way to in front of a Judge; 28 were found to have been held with NO REASONABLE GROUNDS FOR THE DETENTION (It is worth noting that the standard for reasonably detaining is LESS than the familiar “probable cause” which is needed to search a suspect AFTER reasonably detaining him.)

In other words, these men were kidnapped and held incommunicado for year after year for absolutely nothing. And yet we hold some of them still—in obdurate defiance of a judge’s ruling based upon all the “evidence” the administration could adduce, concoct or invent.

And this is the regime that Prez seems willing to perpetuate, export , even to codify with an elaborate Preventive Detention program (Hint: The Detention swallows up the Prevention).

OK, I knew that Prez wasn’t Robin Hood (or Kucinich, or Gravel—they were my guys,..), but I didn’t think he was King John!

“Hard cases”, it is said, make “bad law”. We like the outcome, but we deplore the rule.

The news from Swat presents just such a confrontation between a tremendously felicitous result (a genuine Taliban surrender!!—they actually found someone to play Tojo and someone to play McArthur.) and a broad sanction against the sort of remote, “death from above” kill the bad guy + everyone within 50 yards misslle strike that was used here.

In this case, we learn that as result of the assasination of Baitullah Mehsud in August (plus wife & kids, of course) the not entirely unpredictable struggle amongst his lieutenants has totally unravelled the same organization that had successfully forced a truce on the Pak government and then, in violation thereof, occupied and run the whole Swat valley for several months.

I am broadly inclined to the truth of the proposition that no individual’s death, when purchased at the cost of our committment to law and order, can ultimately be useful in a struggle where hearts and minds are the playing field. itself. (David Kilcullen presents a thoughtful *calculus for identifying potential exceptions to this rule and would surely consider Mehsud such.)

The particular Taliban in question, moreover, are especially **odious.

That said, I am disturbed to discover in myself this sentiment, which I must in candor disclose: ” I’m glad they snuffed you Ba’it-ullah! Rot in your Yahwist hell, you twisted perverted asshole!”.

So, does this make me a bad person?

*1) The target in question poses a threat to the international community (not solely to U.S. forces or interests in Afghanistan); AND 2) It is located in an area outside of effective Pakistani sovereignty (e.g. in a non-controlled area of the FATA or in a micro-haven elsewhere) AND 3) Pakistan has tried but failed to extend its sovereignty into the area, or to deal effectively with the target on its own; AND 4) The target is positively identified and clearly distinguishable from surrounding populations, reducing the risk of collateral damage to a level acceptable to elected political leaders.

**They also come at me where I live, so to speak; .”Earlier this year they executed one of the valley’s most popular dancers as part of a moral crusade to drive out public entertainment.”