Wednesday, January 31, 2018

Trump Announcement Via EO: “Gitmo Now All Mine and Will Remain Open Forever”

Trump at campaign stop in Sparks, NV said: “We are keeping it open and we're gonna load it up with some bad dudes – believe me.”

Trump's newest Real Estate deal: Sole owner of Gitmo -- it's all his from now on lock, stock, and barrel – the story and headlines from the Toronto Star below:

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump has signed a new executive order announcing his intent to keep the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo (Gitmo) Bay, Cuba open (White House announced on January 30).

Trump made it clear during his 2016 campaign for president that he wanted to keep Guantanamo open and “load it up with some bad dudes.” But the White House announcement came just before his first State of the Union address, and it marked a formal reversal of former president Barack Obama’s eight-year effort to close the detention center and the effort of Geo. W. Bush to also shut it down.

Trump’s EO says the U.S. maintains the option to detain additional enemy combatants there when necessary. It requires the Defense Secretary (James Mattis) to recommend criteria for determining the fate of individuals captured by the United States in armed conflict, including sending them to Guantanamo Bay.

The White House announcement continued: “The executive order preserves a vital tool to protect the United States and its citizens from continuing significant threats. The detention of enemies captured in an armed conflict is a lawful and necessary tool of warfighting that must continue to be available to the United States.”

Short history of Gitmo: It was opened by former president George W. Bush in January 2002 for express purpose to hold and interrogate suspected enemy combatants.

It reached a maximum population of about 800 by the summer of 2003. 

1.    Mr. Bush went on to transfer out about 500 he left office in January 2009. 

2.  Mr. Obama transferred out 197 detainees thus leaving 41 there today – including five that have been cleared for release but to date are still in holding there. 

3.  Mr. Trump to date has not sent any new detainees to the prison or transferred any out.

Stay tuned. 

Trials are still pending a start date for a half-dozen or so including KSM.

More on this very important issue follows below from many of my previous posts here. 

Thanks for stopping by.

Tuesday, January 16, 2018

"Forever Prisoners at Gitmo" 100% Trump's Property How Long is Unknown

Mine, they're all mine to do whatever I choose to do 
(Even More Torture if I say so)

Interesting story here from the NY Times: Now called the the “forever prisoners at Gitmo.”  

Background: Even before he took office, Trump made it clear that no one would be getting out of the military prison at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, on his watch. Trump said: “They were extremely dangerous people,” and it didn’t matter how long they had been locked up or whether they had been charged with any crimes. They should give up any hope of release – hence the label “forever prisoners.”

Trump wasn’t just walking away from the efforts of his two predecessors to shrink the population of the prison and, eventually, to close it. He wanted to make it bigger — to load it up with some bad dudes as he said.

The status of Gitmo detainees today:

Thirteen either have active cases in the military commission system or have been convicted.

The rest have been held as enemy combatants, but without charge, some for up to 16 years, and five of those have been cleared for transfer, meaning that the Pentagon, the White House, and intelligence agencies long ago agreed that they pose no security threat.

Many of those were arrested under questionable circumstances; and, some were tortured, either at CIA black sites or at Guantánamo.

Eleven of these “so-called forever prisoners” filed a habeas corpus petition in the US District Court in Washington, DC. 

Those 11 are all foreign-born Muslims, and they say their continued detention violates the Constitution’s guarantee of due process and that the 2001 law that gave presidents the power to send enemy combatants to Guantánamo.

One of the plaintiffs, prisoner No. 893, a 45-year-old Yemeni named Tolfiq al- Bihani, has been held at Guantánamo for nearly 15 years. He was cleared for conditional release in 2010. Even the Saudi government agreed to accept him in 2016, along with nine other Yemenis. 

Those nine were in fact all transferred, but Mr. al-Bihani remains locked up at Guantánamo without any explanation.

For the record:

Former President George W. Bush may be guilty of creating the constitutional calamity that is Guantánamo today, but at least he made an effort to empty it of men who clearly posed no threat to the United States. He released 532 detainees by the end of his second term.

Then former President Barack Obama, who was blocked by Republicans in Congress from keeping his campaign promise to close the prison, established regular reviews of each inmate’s case and worked intensively to negotiate the transfer of those who could not be returned safely to their home countries. In the end, he managed to release 197 detainees.

But, during the 2016 presidential campaign, Trump bragged that he would “absolutely authorize torture techniques like waterboarding, on the ground that terrorism suspects deserve it anyway.” 

And, of course not release any more.

The remaining Guantánamo prisoners appear fated to stay locked up but not based on an individual assessment of their cases — there will be none of those under Trump. Why? Because they serve as convenient symbols of the aggressive anti-terrorist and anti-Muslim platform he ran on.

Yet those men there continue to make a straightforward case for their release. 

The Supreme Court has ruled that prisoners at Guantánamo must have a meaningful opportunity to challenge the legal and factual grounds for their detention, which means that the federal courts have the power to review those claims and grant any appropriate relief. 

So, if our Constitution stands for anything, the plaintiffs argue in their suit, which was filed on their behalf by the Center for Constitutional Rights, it must stand for the proposition that the government cannot detain someone for 16 years without charge. 

The new legal challenge represents the sharpest test yet of America’s commitment to its most important founding principles — the guarantee of due process and the right to habeas corpus, — even for those at Guantánamo.

My 2 cents: So, will we continue to tolerate locking up more than two dozen men there, without charges, forever? That is the $64,000 question isn’t it? 

Now just imagine for a moment if we still had dozens or more of our POW’s locked held and locked up in North Vietnam at the infamous “Hanoi Hilton” like Sen. John McCain was for over five years after he was shot down in October 1967. 

Yeah, just imagine that over the past 51 years. 

Even North Vietnam (at the time) considered that to be “an undeclared war” and yet they labeled our POWs as “war criminals.

Thanks for stopping – these updates are slow and wide apart, but still a timely issue.

Thursday, December 14, 2017

Trump May Rewrite History: Repeats Himself (Again) Saying Torture Works

January 2009: Obama Signs EO to Close Gitmo and Stop Torture

Trump's Next EO: “Keep Gitmo Open and Sustain Torture”

In one of his first acts as president (photo above) former President Obama signed executive orders closing this country’s secret prisons overseas, banning torture and authorizing an end to the detention camp at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba – this story from here (NY Times).

Standing behind Mr. Obama in the above photo (in the Oval Office on January 22, 2009, were 16 retired generals and admirals who had his back, figuratively as well as literally. They were hardly soft-on-terrorism types). 

A few of them were lifelong Republicans. But these military men, working with Human Rights First, felt a moral imperative to oppose torture. They were convinced that it not only trampled core American principles, but also produced useless intelligence while potentially endangering United States troops who might fall into enemy hands.

A leader of that group was James Cullen, a retired brigadier general who had begun Army life as a private during the Vietnam War. He became a lawyer, serving for many years in the Judge Advocate General’s Corps, and later in private practice. In alliance with the human rights group, he and his once-uniformed colleagues lobbied major politicians to support a ban on coercive interrogations. General Cullen died recently in Scarsdale, NY at age 72. His death is a reminder of how former military men and women of conscience and courage can provide helpful support for the civilian leadership — and, if necessary, be a bulwark against the worst instincts that at times grab hold of it.

Now today: Obama didn’t fully get his way since today Guantánamo, though reduced to a few dozen prisoners, is still operating, but Trump more than once has expressed full faith in the harsh methods described euphemistically as enhanced interrogation techniques (which is the buzzword for torture).

Trump during one of his 2016 presidential debates said: “Don’t tell me it doesn’t work — torture works.” 

No, Mr. Trump, torture does not work!!! Period.

Call his remarks and such as a WTF moment in our history with a president whose respect for the rule of law is meager and whose expressed affinity for example: waterboarding and even in his own words: “A hell of a lot worse” is needed. 

Now Trump has surrounded himself with retired generals, and many Americans are counting on them to restrain his most reckless impulses. The endless barrage of insults and threats from the tweeter in chief — plus decisions running counter to sound national security policy — shows that efforts to rein him in have been mixed at best.

My input: I wonder how many times I and other professional interrogators like me have to say in no uncertain terms that “torture does not work – never. Plus, it is illegal, unlawful, and a war crime.”

Just don’t try and tell that to Trump – the novice-in-chief, or so it seems
So, what’s next? Maybe he will write another of his famous EO’s and cancel Mr. Obama’s order to close the place. Let’s face it, we have seen by Trump’s actions that he wants to erase everything/anything attached to Mr. Obama.

Thanks for stopping by.

Tuesday, August 22, 2017

Undisclosed Settlement in CIA Torture Case: Jessen and Mitchell Plaintiffs

Bruce Jessen and James Mitchell: CIA Torture Program Developers
(Defense Claim: We were just following orders)

He also made the claim: I was only following orders.

Adolf Eichmann, former Nazi S.S. colonel. Mossad captured him in May 1960.
His trial inside a bulletproof booth in Jerusalem, 1961. Hanged the following year. 
[Photo from Reuters]

Pretty startling headlines from the NY TIMES:

Settlement Reached in CIA Torture Case

A settlement in the lawsuit against former Air Force psychologists (*Bruce Jessen and James Mitchell, both unskilled, unqualified, and inexperienced interrogators) who helped devise the CIA’s brutal interrogation program (Buzzword: “Enhanced interrogation techniques”) was reached bringing to an end an unusual effort to hold any government individuals accountable for the techniques the agency adopted after the 9/11 – conducted at Gitmo and “black sites” worldwide.

Lawyers for three plaintiffs, a suit filed in 2015 in the Federal District Court, Spokane, WA said the former detainees were tortured at the secret (black sites which the CIA operated). The settlement was reached after a judge urged resolving the case before it headed to a jury trial that was scheduled for early September.

The plaintiffs — two former detainees and the family of a third who died in custody — had sought unspecified punitive and compensatory damages. The terms of the settlement are confidential, and it is unclear whether a financial payout was involved. The parties agreed to a joint statement in which the psychologists said that they had advised the CIA and that the plaintiffs had suffered abuses, but that they were not responsible.

In a phone interview, one of the plaintiffs, Mohamed Ben Soud, said through a translator: “I feel that justice has been served. Our goal from the beginning was justice and for people to know what happened in this black hole that was run by the CIA offices.”

The plaintiffs said that Jessen and Mitchell profited richly from their work as contractors for the CIA – each received up to $1,800 a day. They later formed a company that was paid about $81 million to help operate the interrogation program over several years.

Our government (in our name) agreed to indemnify the men and their company, including paying their legal fees, judgments, and settlements up to $5 million. Some of those funds were used to cover legal bills during DOJ investigations. As of November 2011, there was close to $4 million left, according to a document made public in the lawsuit.

James T. Smith, their lead counsel, said in a statement that his clients were “public servants whose actions in regard to the interrogation of suspected terrorists were authorized by the U.S. government, legal and done in an effort to protect innocent lives.”

My note, I have to say as strongly and as professionally as I can: The “authorized” part refers to the infamous John Yoo/Jay Bybee, et al memos (that said it was okay. Further note: memos cannot change established law seen here from Cornell Law that I often refer to – the interrogations were illegal, unlawful, and a war crime – period. For those who pulled the “we were only following orders, may I refer them and their counsel to the Nuremberg trials – this aspect is sickening in American history.

Speaking by phone after the settlement was announced, Dr. Mitchell said he found it “regrettable that one guy died and those other guys were treated badly,” and he added: “We had nothing to do with it. We’re not responsible for it. They say we are, but in my view they’re wrong.”

Related case documents linked below are .pdf transcripts of the depositions and the latest declassified CIA documents:

·        James E. Mitchell
·        John B. Jessen
·        John Rizzo
·        Jose Rodriguez
·        Mohamed Ahmed Ben Soud
·        Obaidullah
·        Suleiman Abdullah Salim
·        CIA Cables

The psychologists produced a memo in 2002 proposing harsh techniques to be used on terrorism suspects thought to be resisting interrogations. The CIA adopted nearly all of these methods, including waterboarding, stuffing prisoners into small boxes, forcing them to hold painful positions for hours, and slamming them into flexible walls.

The so-called “enhanced interrogation techniques” were based on those used in military survival schools (SERE schools) that are used to simulate what our service members might undergo if captured.

My Insert: I used to teach and supervise the “R (Resist)” part of the SERE acronym named classes: “Survive, Evade, Resist, and Escape, so I know a helluva lot more than Jessen and Mitchell combined.

Those “enhanced (a fancy word for torture that cannot be dressed otherwise) were later condemned as illegal under U.S. and International law (i.e., Geneva conventions), and were ultimately banned and agreed to by our signing of treaties.

Also, the American Psychological Association consequently prohibited its members from participating in national security interrogations.

Note: As a candidate for president, Trump said he would bring back waterboarding and “a hell of a lot worse.” Then later he said he would defer to Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and his strong opposition — a widespread view in the military — to torture and prisoner mistreatment.

The case against Jessen and Mitchell proceeded despite multiple attempts by their lawyers to have it dismissed. They argued that the men acted solely under the authority of the government and were entitled to the same immunity as government officials. The judge, Justin L. Quackenbush, also denied motions by both sides requesting that he rule summarily in their favor before a trial.

Although there will be no public trial, the case — over its nearly two-year course — expanded public knowledge about the CIA torture program. Previously secret documents were declassified, including CIA cables from the covert prisons known as black sites. Jessen and Mitchell, along with the former CIA officials Jose Rodriguez and John Rizzo, were subjected to lengthy questioning by opposing lawyers in video depositions. Their sometimes sterile description of the techniques contrasted with the emotional accounts, in separate depositions, of the men who underwent them.

The plaintiffs and some of their experiences are described in the executive summary of the 6,700-page Senate Intelligence Committee Report on Torture. The report, published in December 2014 and based on a five-year review of over six million pages of documents, lists 38 men known to have been subjected to the techniques in CIA prisons. It denounced the methods as brutal and criticized the CIA for providing false and misleading information to federal officials about the interrogation program’s effectiveness.

The psychologists came into direct contact with only one of the three detainees, Gul Rahman, who died in CIA custody in Afghanistan in 2002, probably of hypothermia, according to an agency investigation into his death.

The judge ruled last week that a trial could also proceed on behalf of the two other former prisoners — Ben Soud and Suleiman Salim — whose lawyers argued that the psychologists had aided and abetted their torture.

Mr. Ben Soud, a Libyan detained by the CIA  in 2003 and held in Afghanistan, was locked in small boxes, slammed against a wall and doused with buckets of ice water while naked and shackled. Mr. Salim, a Tanzanian also captured in 2003 and held by the CIA in Afghanistan, was beaten, isolated in a dark cell for months, doused with water and deprived of sleep.

The ACLU and the Gibbons law firm of Newark brought the lawsuit under the Alien Tort Statute, which allows foreign citizens to seek justice in United States courts for violations of their rights under international law or United States treaties.

My summary: This undisclosed “settlement” does not in the minds of many “settle” anything – this shameful stain will remain on the United States in perpetuity.

Thanks for stopping and sharing your thoughts.

Sunday, August 13, 2017

Q & A: Was Enhanced Interrogation Program Controlled Human Experimentation

Studying Detainees During Various Stages of Torture

What follows is an extract from this very thought-provoking article that ties in with those other posts below about Mitchell and Jessen – it asks this explosive question by this author of the piece – Gregg Bloche (@greggbloche), a psychiatrist, who now teaches law at Georgetown and is the author of “The Hippocratic Myth.”

The question:

Was the CIA enhanced interrogation program an instance of human experimentation?

 (I Note: Keep in mind that the word: “enhanced” is a fancy buzzword for torture).

Related to the topic is here – Subject: “The 30 most disturbing human experiments in history.”

A Word of Caution: Some may find the article and images disturbing – so, read at your own risk accordingly.

Recently declassified documents raise this explosive question. The documents were obtained by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) in connection with a federal lawsuit scheduled for trial next month. The case was brought on behalf of three former detainees against two psychologists who developed the CIA’s program. I reviewed some of the documents in a recent article in The Texas Law Review.

Internal CIA records indicate that the psychologists, James Mitchell and Bruce Jessen (Note: The next 4 posts after this one address Mitchell and Jessen and the work they did for the CIA in our name) anticipated objections that critics would later level against the program, such as that coercion might generate unreliable information, and contracted with the agency to design research tools that addressed some of these concerns.

I Note this Important Point: Redactions in the released documents (and the CIA’s withholding of others) make it impossible to know the full extent, if any, of the agency’s data collection efforts or the findings they yielded.

At their depositions for the ACLU lawsuit, each of the psychologists denied having evaluated the program’s effectiveness. But the CIA paid the two psychologists (some $80 million) to develop a research methodology and instructed physicians and other medical staff members at clandestine detention sites to monitor and chart the health conditions of detainees.

In response, the advocacy group Physicians for Human Rights has charged that the program was an unlawful experiment on human beings. It calls the program “one of the gravest breaches of medical ethics by United States health professionals since the Nuremberg Code.”

Those were the ethical principles written to protect people from human experimentation after World War II mostly conducted by the Nazis. In its lawsuit, the ACLU is pressing a similar claim.

These claims are a bit of a reach since in “a true experimental study, the CIA would have had to test its interrogation strategy against one or more standard interrogation methods, using experimental and control groups of captives.”

There’s no evidence that the CIA did that.

(I Also Note: In 2010, the CIA first denied it conducted “human subject research on any detainee or group of detainees”).

Story continues at the link above – worth reading.

Thanks for stopping by.

Wednesday, August 2, 2017

Mitchell and Jessen Trial Hearing Set for August 4 in Spokane, WA

Bruce Jessen and James Mitchell

This story is about Mitchell and Jessen (photos above, and cited in below posts) re: their upcoming hearing outlined in this report

They are apt to say: “We were just following orders” (just like those Nazis claimed at Nuremberg in 1945-46).

More likely today those two are claiming:We were just following the government’s contract specs – yes, we did modify it later and watched and yes, we even participated in some of the “enhanced methods we developed and refined them, too, but we did our duty by fulfilling the contract, and yes, we were paid some $80 million) – so what – we were just following orders.”

(Note: “Enhanced” is a buzzword for torture)

Whoa – stop the press – hold it a darn minute for this short edit. Let’s be clear here shall we – “Just following orders” ain’t gonna hack it for Mitchell and Jessen.  

It didn’t work in 1945-1946 for the Nazis on trial for war crimes, and it won’t fly today, either. The heart of the defense’s case argument in their motion to dismiss a lawsuit from former detainees outlined in the article, are the points below:

1.  The two, Mitchell and Jessen (both former Air Force psychologists who helped craft the CIA’s harsh interrogation techniques known as “enhanced” (again the buzzword for “torture”) should be as free from liability as a worker for a company that supplied the Nazis with poison gas used in concentration camps in WWII.

2.  Like the gassing technician who was acquitted on charges of helping the Nazis, James Mitchell and Bruce Jessen were independent contractors who lacked authority to “control, prevent or modify” the CIA’s use of enhanced interrogation techniques.

The ACLU challenges that defense claim, saying the psychologists should be held accountable for the methods they designed following the September 11 terror attacks – wherein those methods included waterboarding, beatings, and worse.

Notes: (1) The Nuremberg tribunals that judged the Nazis and their enablers after World War II established the opposite rule re: innocent contractors who developed the gas saying in part: “Private contractors are accountable when they choose to provide unlawful means and profit from war crimes.” 

(2) And, the owner of the company that developed the poison gas for the Nazis was executed after World War II.

(3) Even for countries that never signed “The Rules for War or the Geneva Accords, etc.” please note: Following World War II, jurists at the Nuremberg Trials and the Tokyo Trials ruled that by 1939 the rules for armed conflicts, particularly those concerning belligerent and neutral nationals, had been recognized by all civilized nations and thus could apply to officials even of countries that never signed the Hague Conventions.
Historical Notes from the Nuremberg Tribunals:

1.  “Following orders that are illegal, unlawful, and a war crime” are punishable by law and in the case of many of the Nazis – that was the death penalty.

2.  Most of the Nazis used the so-called “Superior orders plea.” That was regarded as the complement to command responsibility.

Superior orders, often known as the Nuremberg defense, lawful orders or by the German phrase Befehl ist Befehl (“Only Following Orders”) literally “An order is an order”) was a plea in a court of law that a person — whether a member of the military, law enforcement, a firefighting force, or the civilian population — not be held guilty for actions which were ordered by a superior officer or an official.

Both sides in this case plan arguments on August 4 in in Spokane. The outcome will determine whether the lawsuit will go to trial, set for September 5, 2017.

The judge could decide that the psychologists are guilty of aiding and abetting torture and no trial is needed, or he could dismiss the suit or limit what claims can be pursued.

My View: Both Mitchell and Jessen, were neither trained or experienced interrogators. They were in it for the money and they knew the plan and they went along with it and made adjustments in the overall techniques… 

Seems to me that they are using a weak excuse of following orders (or in this case, the government contract specs) and in turn, the CIA will duck and say that’s what we paid them for. 

This is an important phase in the long-term damaging event in American history and still today, and there are still 41 detainees at Gitmo, some who went through the same set of techniques (namely KSM). 

Note Insert: The Senate Intelligence Committee report on the CIA program, released in 2014, under a section titled “The CIA Waterboards KSM at Least 183 Times,” says that “On March 10, 2003, KSM was subjected to the first of his 15 separate waterboarding sessions” 

(Note: One procedure in each session was counted and thus equaled the total of 183 times for the entire 15 sessions).

Let’s hope that justice does not escape from in this tragedy.

Saturday, July 29, 2017

Showtime: “Wannabe Interrogators” Heading for Trial Re: CIA Torture Program

“Enhanced” Interrogation: Illegal, unlawful, a war crime

Inexperienced and unqualified “Interrogators” 
(except in their own minds)

A federal court judge has refused (July 28th) to drop a lawsuit against two psychologists who devised the CIA’s interrogation program after the September 11 terrorist attacks and this now clears the way for the case to proceed to a trial in September.

(My Notes: Mitchell and Jessen BTW neither have any interrogation experience – not one day. Also, they were paid over $80 million. 

The suit is one of the few attempts to hold people accountable for harm caused by the CIA “enhanced” interrogation program in the years after the 2001 attacks.

(My Note: “Enhanced” is a fancy buzzword for torture – believe me, I know from my over a dozen years in that business).

The three plaintiffs had argued that they were detained and tortured in secret CIA prisons using techniques designed by the two former military psychologists. Most of the techniques used against the detainees have since been banned by the United States government.

At a hearing in United States District Court in Spokane, WA, Judge Justin L. Quackenbush said he would deny motions by both sides to rule summarily in their favor in advance of a trial. However, he said he would issue a written ruling as to whether the case could go forward on behalf of two of the plaintiffs, who never came into contact with the defendants.

This case is long overdue to remove this historical stain on the country. We must always demand justice in these cases. This hopefully will be that justice. Time will tell. Stay tuned.

Thanks for stopping by.

Saturday, June 24, 2017

CIA “Enhanced Interrogation” Two Program Designers Speak With Other Morons

Torture is a “Black and White Issue not 50 Shades of Gray”

Updated story on the many people involved in torture with the two primary nitwits who developed the so-called “enhanced” interrogation program… their video testimony is painful to watch [click] here (about 10-minutes). 
More of that NY Times story here
Now a flashback to the days it all started and where we are today with Donald J. Trump in charge – whew boy. 
My advice, hang on tight. That piece of this story is here from Business Insider
Highlights re: Trump on Torture:
In an interview with ABC News awhile back, Mr. Trump said he would wage war against Islamic State militants with the singular goal of keeping the U.S. safe. Asked specifically about the simulated drowning technique known as waterboarding, Trump cited the extremist group's atrocities against Christians and others and said: “We have to fight fire with fire.”
Trump then said he would consult with new Defense Secretary James Mattis and CIA Director Mike Pompeo before authorizing any new policy.
He also said he had asked top intelligence officials in the past day: “Does torture work?”
Trump once said (but Mattis and Pompeo both disagree): “And the answer was yes, absolutely.” Then he quickly added that he wants to do “everything within the bounds of what you're allowed to do legally.”
[Hint Mr. Trump: Torture is illegal, unlawful, and a war crime, Mr. Trump – period.]
In may be in for some very bad times (again) now with so many novices in charge under Trump - time will tell.
Thanks for stopping by.

Monday, June 5, 2017

MESSAGE FOR AMERICA: Turn Off—Stop Watching FOX & Friends and All FOX

The Lowest of the Low in Intelligence Work (Total Fraud) 
(Especially About Interrogation )

This man and his co-author and fellow designer of “Enhanced Interrogation” that the CIA and others used (illegally) is a total fake and fraud ... he has never been an interrogator and yet our CIA paid them both some $80 million to develop the program which by all standards is illegal, unlawful, and a war crime.

Watch this interview with him (it is about 8-minutes):

Now in his recent appearance on FOX and Friends to hawk his new book, the lead question by co-host Brian Kilmeade sustains a proven lie that “torture” lead to bin-Laden.

FACT (from NPR report): Torture (the so-called “Enhanced Interrogation” is just a fancy word for torture) did not lead to bin-Laden. That is a huge lie and it is disgusting and an excellent reason to shit can those kinds of FOX shows from the airwaves.

Here is positive proof about that lie: After an exhaustive three-year investigation, the Senate Intelligence Committee came to the conclusion that those claims are overblown or downright lies.

Finally, at this blog I have always tried my best to stick with the facts, not FOX or Rightwing or one-sided GOP bullshit otherwise.

... Thanks for stopping by come any time.