[BlessedBeGod]

To show it would only appeal to certain pornographic sensibilities. The fact is, that by no showing it the effect will be much stronger in two ways. First, because human imagination tends to make up even worse than the actual images would show (not that they aren't sickening and heinous).

You're wrong.

First, I don't have any "pronogrphic sensibilities." I wanted to see exactly what those SOBs did to him for my own information. Simply that and no more.

Secondly, it was worse than my human imagination thought it would be.

It has rekindled my anger from 9/11, which had evolved somewhat of a teary sentimental sadness. Now I remember why we're fighting and what we're fighting for, and how much farther we need to go before it's over.

Did I like watching it? Are you kidding? But I'm glad I did, because now I think I have my head screwed on straight again re the enemy.

[newheart]

Well, I've been wrong plenty of times.

With all due respect, however, one definition of pornography means simply lurid or sensational images. It should not take that to set one straight about the enemy. There are places where the true enemy (the powers and pricipalities) are very close to the surface. Surely al Qaida is a good example.