Shorter* Falkor:
POINT: It seems wrong to paint enemy combatants invisible so no one can see the evidence that they have been tortured; or see that they are still, in fact, indefinitely detained; or whether they are even real enemy combatants.

Shorter* Gizzard:
COUNTER-POINT: Big deal, the enemy combatants are invisible! Enemy combatants have been declared enemy combatants! So, by definition, they are enemy combatants! Enemy combatants should be painted invisible, tortured and detained indefinitely, because they are the ENEMY!

Shorter* Edict of the 19 Quart Lobster Pot:
COUNTER-COUNTER-POINT: Perception is the vital key to victory in any conflict. The more enemies we render invisible, the fewer enemies remain visible. Thus the threat is diminished. Those who would illuminate the existence of an enemy seek to undermine this perception-- in aid of the enemy --and should themselves be considered enemy combatants.


* There are no "longers," Spot.


The events and characters depicted in this bloggoplay are fictitious. Any similarity to actual persons, living, dead or bloginary, is purely coincidental... Or is it intentional? I always forget how that goes.