I don\u2019t get this. A reader <\/a>responds to this post (documenting the fact that a significant aspect of our casus belli for war with Iraq\u2013namely, the phony Iraq\/Al-Quaeda link\u2013was a fiction obtained through torture) with this mysterious complaint:<\/p>\n Mark, this is a very troublesome post. You don\u2019t approve of waterboarding. Ok. I understand what you\u2019re saying but to be sarcastic as to our reasons for going to war? That really offends me. Saying that there was a link between Iraq and al Queda and getting sarcastic about it was\u2026disappointing. (not the first word that comes to mind but it will do) <\/p>\n Mark, I really respected you and your blog. This whole tone is obnoxious and beneath you and your posters. <\/p>\n Sean O\u2019Kane and his \u201cneo-cons\u201d rant is also obnoxious.<\/p>\n What is it with you guys? I thought this blog was going to be Christian-in-nature, intelligent, thought-provoking\u2026<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Several things come to mind, the first being Tom Kreitzberg\u2019s <\/a>hilarious rejoinder to my amazement about how people seem to get far more upset about failure to keep the conventions, than about failure to keep the commandments:<\/p>\n