I find rendition mentioned nowhere here. Your original point is very good, his conflation of the KGB's persecution of Soviet citizens with Guantanomo and with your point makes a couple of huge stretches, in the process polluting your original argument past the point of recognition much less sober consent. Objections to Guantanomo can't begin with the idea that it is a way of persecuting citizens of the country running it; since that's the precise opposite of the original legal basis for using a prison not in the United States - namely to keep non-US citizens from gaining any of the rights of US citizens. Contrary-to-fact is a poor start; I like your argument, it didn't benefit from his help, IMHO.