Why one would want to engage in a debate with lawyer turned political polemicist Glenn Greenwald is beyond me. Any debate with him will end up becoming a circular sink of decreasing radii. "Debunk", perhaps.

The question is not whether a person is an "terrorism expert" (BTW: is someone, who e.g., meets the minimal legal requirements to testify as an "expert" in court, an "expert" for other purposes ?), but what useful things that person can contribute to understanding the multi-headed beast that is called "terrorism".

Regards

Mike