Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The Top 10 Torturous Lies of Liz Cheney

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Vyan Donating Member (990 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-25-09 09:53 PM
Original message
The Top 10 Torturous Lies of Liz Cheney
Edited on Sat Apr-25-09 10:34 PM by Vyan
In this performance on MSNBC Liz Cheney, daughter of the Former Vice President, was absolutely stunning in her delivery of rapid-fire talking points in an attempt to obfuscate the fact that under her Father and President Bush this country engaged in Totalitarian Methods and War Crimes - and in the process still failed to protect America by using false intelligence and false confessions to begin an unwarranted invasion of Iraq.

Watch Video

In the following I take on her talking points one by one.

Point by Point...

False Claim 1: The Program was Widely Approved and Legal.

The first act by President Bush in this matter, on recommendation from John Yoo and Alberto Gonzales, was to deny that Geneva protections applied to al Qaeda and Taliban fighters. This temporarily invalidated the War Crimes Act (18 USC 2441), but did not make Torture (18 USC 2340) Legal. This action was later overturned by the SCOTUS in Hamdan v Rumsfeld which found that Geneva absolutely *did* apply, meaning that Bush's original determination was wrongly reached.

Also FBI Agents threatened to Arrest CIA interrogators for their treatment of Abu Zubaydah.

This conflict between FBI and CIA led to Director Mueller's pulling all of his agents out of future CIA directed interrogation efforts. If all of this was so legal, why did the FBI run like scared rabbits away from it?

Several attorney's within DOJ and the State Dept dissented with OLC memos which legitimized the use of SERE-tactics as legal interrogation methods. THESE ATTORNEY'S WERE RETALIATED AGAINST FOR THEIR VIEWS. The Zelikow Memo was ordered to be destroyed. Assistant Attorney General Jack Goldsmith was forced to resign by Cheney's Counsel David Addington after ordering the Yoo memos rescinded. General Counsel to the Navy, Alberto Mora wrote a memo detailing the abuse at GTMO and rebutting the Yoo Memos, he was forced to retire.


False Claim 2: President Obama and AG Holder have ignored evidence of the program effectiveness.

Key information from Zubaydah was gathered by the FBI before harsh methods were used, such as confirming the identity of KSM. Information gathered after these methods were applied remain dubious and have appeared to be false.

The actual capture of KSM came from other sources besides Zubaydah.

The Los Angeles Library Tower attack was thwarted over a year before KSM was captured.

When asked FBI Director Mueller has stated that to his knowledge No Terrorist Plots were thwarted using coerced information.

Lastly "It Worked" is no excuse - under the UN Convention Against Torture which was signed by President Reagan and ratified by a Republican Congress in 1995, which forms the basis for 18 USC 2340...

No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political in stability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture. An order from a superior officer or a public authority may not be invoked as a justification of torture.

False Claim 3: These tactics weren't torture because they are used in SERE in the training of our own troops.

SERE was developed in response to torture tactics used against our troops in the Korean war by Communist forces. The techniques are identical to those which led to the execution of Japanese soldiers in WWII and prosecution of American soldiers in Vietnam. The Communist used them to illicit False Confessions, not the truth. S.E.R.E. attempts to prepare our Special Forces Troops for undergoing Illegal Tactics used by totalitarian regimes, and is completely voluntary. (UPDATE via Wapo: The Officers who run S.E.R.E. - Call it TORTURE!) The difference between a voluntary program meant to protect our troops and using those techniques on unwitting and unwilling detainees is like the difference between a consensual act and a violent rape. It's obscene.

False Claim 4: Two of the people who were Waterboarded gave us information that saved American Lives.

Yet again the key information supposedly gleaned from Zubaydah, was the identity of KSN - however that was *before* waterboarding was used. The key piece of information from KSM was the Library Tower attack, yet that attack had already been stopped.

Zubaydah was also to source for our capturing Jose Padilla, and this too occurred before harsh methods were employed. In fact it appears that we got pretty much Bupkis from him once things got "heavy".

From the WaPo.

But FBI officials, including agents who questioned him after his capture or reviewed documents seized from his home, have concluded that even though he knew some al-Qaeda players, he provided interrogators with increasingly dubious information as the CIA's harsh treatment intensified in late 2002.

In legal papers prepared for a military hearing, Abu Zubaida himself has asserted that he told his interrogators whatever they wanted to hear to make the treatment stop.


Further, this isn't just about "Waterboarding" - Geneva prohibits "All Affronts to Personal Dignity" and all forms of torture including psychological torture. Exceeding this is a War Crime. Stress positions, sleep deprivation, hypothermia and the exploitation phobias and fears (dogs, insects) can lead to a psychotic break in the subject (as may have occurred with Jose Padilla) renal failure, heart-attack, stroke and/or death. Autopsy reports of detainees all across the various theater's of conflict indicate that in 2005 over 40 detainees had died in custody, largely as a result of mistreatment and that at least 20 of those appeared to have died as a result of HOMICIDE, most likely while being interrogated by CIA, Navy Seals and Military Intelligence.

False Claime #5: Our Intellegence Gathering and Nation has been hurt by release of these memos.

Cheney refers to this Op-ed, by former Bush AG Mukasey and former CIA Chief Hayden which claims:

Disclosure of the techniques is likely to be met by faux outrage, and is perfectly packaged for media consumption. It will also incur the utter contempt of our enemies. Somehow, it seems unlikely that the people who beheaded Nicholas Berg and Daniel Pearl, and have tortured and slain other American captives, are likely to be shamed into giving up violence by the news that the U.S. will no longer interrupt the sleep cycle of captured terrorists even to help elicit intelligence that could save the lives of its citizens.


This claim is directly contradicted by the in-the-field experience of interrogator Matthew Alexander who was able to establish a rapport with an Iraqi insurgent within a few hours and managed to use that information to take down Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi, the head of AQI.

I refused to participate in such (brutal) practices, and a month later, I extended that prohibition to the team of interrogators I was assigned to lead. I taught the members of my unit a new methodology -- one based on building rapport with suspects, showing cultural understanding and using good old-fashioned brainpower to tease out information. I personally conducted more than 300 interrogations, and I supervised more than 1,000. The methods my team used are not classified (they're listed in the unclassified Field Manual), but the way we used them was, I like to think, unique. We got to know our enemies, we learned to negotiate with them, and we adapted criminal investigative techniques to our work (something that the Field Manual permits, under the concept of "ruses and trickery"). It worked. Our efforts started a chain of successes that ultimately led to Zarqawi.

Exactly what Cheney, Mukasey and Hayden claim won't work - Does Work! Further, what they claim is "so effective" has according Alexander directly led to the death of American soldiers.

I learned in Iraq that the No. 1 reason foreign fighters flocked there to fight were the abuses carried out at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo. Our policy of torture was directly and swiftly recruiting fighters for al-Qaeda in Iraq. The large majority of suicide bombings in Iraq are still carried out by these foreigners. They are also involved in most of the attacks on U.S. and coalition forces in Iraq. It's no exaggeration to say that at least half of our losses and casualties in that country have come at the hands of foreigners who joined the fray because of our program of detainee abuse. The number of U.S. soldiers who have died because of our torture policy will never be definitively known, but it is fair to say that it is close to the number of lives lost on Sept. 11, 2001. How anyone can say that torture keeps Americans safe is beyond me -- unless you don't count American soldiers as Americans.

False Claim #6: The Techniques were limited and carefully controlled

The clear goal of using doctors and psychiatrist during the interrogation process was not to keep them from being in discomfort, it was clearly to prevent them from dying too quickly so that the interrogations could continue on and on and on. Far from being Limited, KSM was waterboarded 183 Times within 30 days and Zubaydah over 83 times. Besides according to Yoo, the only way it could be "torture" is if some of them actually did - DIE. (Which some did!)

False Claim #7: The Program had Broad-based Support within the Higher-ups of the Administration, including all members of the National Security Council

Not if you count Secretary of State Colin Powell, the only member of the Bush NSC with Military experience, who strongly opposed invalidating the Geneva Conventions as did numerous members of the Military.

False Claim #8: These techniques were done to our own people (via S.E.R.E.) and they were not "Tortured".

S.E.R.E. was developed from Torture done to our own people by the communists as mentioned above, but a review of CIA prisons by the International Red Cross, which is the entity empowered by Geneva to identify torture, clearly shows - We Tortured Them.

The Red Cross found that detainees were held for up to four years in secret prisons, were frequently made to stand for several days in positions evidently intended to cause pain, and were threatened with "electric shocks, infection with HIV, sodomy of the detainee and ... being brought close to death."


This was also confirmed by Military Judge Susan Crawford.

We tortured Qahtani, said Susan J. Crawford, in her first interview since being named convening authority of military commissions by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates in February 2007. His treatment met the legal definition of torture. And thats why I did not refer the case for prosecution. <...>


False Claim #9: Revealing these techniques will allow our enemies to train to withstand them.

First off, if the techniques are so effective - how can you train to withstand them? Further, since the techniques have been effectively banned not only by Obama's adoption of the Army Field Manual for the CIA, but also the Detainee Treatment Act - why should it matter what they train for, when we aren't using these techniques anymore anyway?

False Claim #10: Al Qeada doesn't follow Geneva so why should we?

Geneva doesn't require that those you are fighting against, also abide by Geneva - it applies to the actions of the signers, not the actions of the non-signatories. Also, Al-Qeada might not be the only enemy we ever face in the future, and if we can choose not to abide by Geneva just because we don't feel like it anymore - what is there to stop anyone else from doing the exact same thing, including current signatories? Future despots can and *will* use Cheney-esque argument to mistreat and abuse our soldiers and the soldiers of our allies, and because we've abdicated our authority on the matters, there's little we can do to stop it other than to say "Stop" and look ridiculous.


All taken together this is a devastating array of lies at worst, and deluded denial of facts and truth at best which has helped enable and continue a world-wide atrocity. It can't be allowed to stand, any repetition of these baseless talking points need to be taken down and taken down Hard.

Vyan

Update: Bonus False Claim (From Following Section of O'Donnel Interview: That the events at Abu Ghraib were in no way connected to changes made in Bush Policy.

As shown by the ACLU's Torture Timeline.

Following Bush's determination that "Geneva Doesn't Apply" and various memos from Gonzales, Yoo and Bybee authorized and justifyed the use of a variety of harsh interrogation methods which were first tested on Zubaydah in Thailand, which were then exported in response to requests from the commanders at GTMO. Following that request in Dec of 2002 SECDEF Rumsfeld authorized new techniques such as hooding, stress positions, nudity, the use of phobias, dogs, sensory deprivation, environmental controls (hypothermia), sexual humiliation as a way to "soften up" detainees.

On that memo Rumsfeld handwrote..."I stand for 8-10 hours a day. Why is standing limited to 4 hours?" Rumsfeld used a "standing desk" for doing his work, the problem with his argument is that he has freedom to move and shift positions, but in a standing stress position the subjects movements are limited which can over the coarse of time induce renal failure and death. That's why the 4-hour limit.

In January of 2003 the commander at Bagram AFB, Afghanistan officially implemented the new Rumsfeld's techniques going far beyond the Army Field Manual, which is written to be consistent with Geneva. This ultimately results in the death of several detainees (A clear violation of even the "Bybee Standard").

In August of 2003 on recommendations from Lt. Gen Sanchez, Rumsfeld sent the commander of Guantanamo (Gen. Miller) to Abu Ghraib to Gitmo-ize it. The new commander removed the authority of the standard base commander Gen. Kaprinski over the "Hard Site" and positions the MP's handling prisoners there under the command of Military Intelligence, then proceeded to implement The same tactics Rumsfeld had previously approved for GITMO and Bagram

The pictures that we all saw at Abu Ghraib, the hooding, the nudity, and stress positions were all authorized by Rumsfeld and exported to the Hard Site on his orders. The argument has long been that this wasn't an "Intelligence Mission" because those who were mistreated clearly were not high-value members of al Qaeda, but using his sources journalist Sy Hersh (who first broke the Abu Ghraib story) has found the explanation for all this. In his book "Chain of Command" he argues that this treatment was intended to be used a s blackmail (hence all the pictures and photos) against low-value targets who would them be released and coerced into becoming spies against the insurgency.

The original idea behind the sexually humiliating photos taken at Abu Ghraib, Hersh said he had heard, was to use them as blackmail so that the newly released prisoners - many of whom were ordinary Iraqi thieves or even civilian bystanders rounded up in dragnets - would act as informants. "We operate on guilt, operate on shame," Hersh explained. "The idea of photographing an Arab man naked and having him simulate homosexual activity, and having an American GI woman in the photographs, is the end of society in their eyes."


Abu Ghraib was no boating accident, it was a Covert Op.

This is why even in while putting together the Taguba Report, investigators into Abu Ghraib were prohibited from looking at the actions and motivations of higher-ups, and instead told to focus on scapegoats like Grainer and England who were for the most part only doing what Un-ranked Military Intelligence Officers had instructed them to do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Avalux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-25-09 10:01 PM
Response to Original message
1. Good work on the analysis. I watched both segments of the interview.
My only question is this - how the hell is Liz Cheney an expert on torture?? Is it because her last name is Cheney? :shrug:

If you think about it, her even giving that interview is absurd. My favorite is her insistence that torture is OK because we did it to our own soldiers. :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vixengrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-25-09 10:12 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. What is the deal with that? Is the concept of consent totally lost, there?
If I consent to be struck, or water-boarded, or whatever, and the duration is finite, I can deal. If I did not consent, and I have no idea what's going on, I have a total loss of autonomy. Of course, that would be worse.

I can almost envision an embrace of rape by such thinking, once you take out that nasty little consentuality bit. Maybe they could use it to make rape rooms like Saddam's more legal and humane. They could call it something like "nonconsentual sexual coersion." Or, for those who still believe that "words mean things", "NSC" might be more palatable. As in:

"We took turns applying NSC to the detainee until no further utility from that application could be detected," as opposed to, "We gang-banged that *haji* until she couldn't talk."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Downwinder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-26-09 09:38 AM
Response to Reply #1
21. Growing up under the control of a torturer would make one an expert.
Surviving would also bring acceptance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlbertCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-26-09 10:25 AM
Response to Reply #1
24. her even giving that interview is absurd.
Wait 'til the Cheney's pets are on the TODAY SHOW!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vixengrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-25-09 10:04 PM
Response to Original message
2. Great research, Vyan.
I think it's particularly strange that both Liz and her father are willing to so publically say things we can easily verify just aren't true. It's as if they were *begging* us to catch them out--instead of a defense for what happened, they are making a noose!

Two reasons for that occur to me: they are both remarkably insulated from reality and thnk they can just shape other people's opinions to match their own, or, they think we are all remarkably stupid, and they are the smart ones. I lean towards the former. But since Cheney airs his views on FOX Un_News Channel, he may be banking on the latter.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
northofdenali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-25-09 10:06 PM
Response to Original message
3. Nice research, nice refutation.
K&R and bookmarked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-25-09 10:16 PM
Response to Original message
5. Great stuff! We know, she was sent out there because he's
scared.

Relish that. So deserved.

And thanks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PerfectSage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-25-09 10:19 PM
Response to Original message
6. Liz forgot to refute: Her husband is a "dick" and a "sexual sadist" who gets off on torture.
Edited on Sat Apr-25-09 10:20 PM by PerfectSage
Ask Liz who many wars her pos husband won? Any?

"Dick" couldn't win a war if you smashed him over the head with a silver victory platter and built a temple to Nike the goddess of victory in his honour. :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-25-09 10:25 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Her dad. Dick's "wife" is named Lynne. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PerfectSage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-25-09 10:39 PM
Response to Reply #7
12. Whoops. I guess she's hoping for a bigger cut of her old mans will
If I was her I'd have my senile old turd father shipped off to a shitty nursing home that specialized in torture.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vyan Donating Member (990 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-25-09 10:28 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. Not Husband...
Father, Lynne Cheney is Dick Cheney's wife.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlbertCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-26-09 10:27 AM
Response to Reply #9
25. Lynne Cheney is Dick Cheney's wife.
And she's a piece o' work too!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-25-09 10:27 PM
Response to Original message
8. Well done, k & r
Posts like this on forums like DU are why corporate media obviously sucks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vyan Donating Member (990 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-25-09 10:31 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. Nora...
actualy did a pretty good job of pushing back against Liz's BS, and Lawrence O'Donnell came up afterwards and wiped the floor with her, but it frankly wasn't enough. This stuff needs to be STOMPED LIKE A COCKROACH!

See it all here: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/4/23/16742/4719

Vyan
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
glitch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-25-09 10:33 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. Thank you for watchng so that I don't have to. And for the additional link. :) nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Swagman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-25-09 10:52 PM
Response to Original message
13. thanks for such informative research
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Richard Steele Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-25-09 10:54 PM
Response to Original message
14. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
santamargarita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-25-09 11:23 PM
Response to Original message
15. I'm looking forward to her reaction when this prick is finally locked up
:puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC_SKP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-25-09 11:47 PM
Response to Original message
16. Terrific Post!!!
Proud to Recommend@

:applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueMTexpat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-26-09 02:07 AM
Response to Original message
17. Many thanks for the excellent post ... if even a small percentage
of US MSM had done their jobs as well, perhaps some of this horror ... on all sides ... could have been prevented. As it is, basic common sense such as that shown by Matthew Alexander and those he supervised (at least as described here) is far more effective in the long run and does not cost us our national soul.

K&R! :kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Wizard Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-26-09 07:40 AM
Response to Original message
18. She's trying to taint the jury pool.
If big Dick gets convicted for war crimes, Liz's inheritance will be in Dubai, and I don't think she wants to spend that much time away from home. If she stays in the States her inheritance could have a levy attached. The Cheney fortune is the result of crimes against humanity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-26-09 08:49 AM
Response to Original message
19. Excellent OP!
Thanks for all your work in pulling this together, it is much appreciated!

Bookmarked and Recommended.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FraDon Donating Member (316 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-26-09 09:06 AM
Response to Original message
20. Bingo! b.k&r
bookmarked, kicked & heartily recommended !
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllyCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-26-09 09:54 AM
Response to Original message
22. I see not much has changed since college, eh Liz?
You're still exactly the same. Okay, maybe meaner.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rhett o rick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-26-09 10:24 AM
Response to Original message
23. K & R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
feslen Donating Member (138 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-26-09 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #23
26. re: come on...
you really think anyone would take that bumbler seriously? Even the interviewer (sorry, forgot the name) was pointing out her fallacies when they talked.

Her dad is running scared, he sends his storm troopers out before he faces the exectuioner!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rhett o rick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-26-09 12:00 PM
Response to Reply #26
28. I think you responded to the wrong post. In any case what is your point ? nm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-26-09 11:37 AM
Response to Original message
27. Thanks for the post and info -- looks like there are a lot of worried Cheneys . . .
Don't know who the MSNBC interviewer was -- "Nora" . . ? -- but very good --

And since when did MSNBC become our liberal network??????

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SlingBlade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-26-09 12:02 PM
Response to Original message
29. Wow, No sense of decency what so ever
These "Families" like the Cheneys and the Bush's and so many more have
kept alive the robber baron tradition's of nineteenth century America

Why they are allowed to show their faces in public without being stoned
just amazes me. If America only knew the truth...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rhett o rick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-26-09 12:11 PM
Response to Reply #29
30. I think sociopathy is genic.
Myra, my spell checker didn't like sociopathy. I have a hard time with spell checkers. Two have already quit on me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bleever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-26-09 01:04 PM
Response to Original message
31. One more: she referred to Dick in the present tense as "the vice president".
Wrong.

He's the EX-vice president.

He's GONE. But the crimes remain for private citizen Richard B. Cheney.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EarthAbides Donating Member (3 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-26-09 01:05 PM
Response to Original message
32. Look at it this way.....
First: Why Norah treated Liz like an expert is beyond me. She should have asked Liz, "Are you here because you are afraid your dad is going to be treated as a war criminal and hung...

Second: OJ promised America that he would find the people that murdered his wife and Ron Goldman, it never happened because OJ knew who the real killer was. Cheney had every opportunity to torture people to find out where Bin Laden was and it appears he never pursued that avenue. Maybe because Cheney knew who was really guilty of the carnage of 9/11 and it was not Bin Laden...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Raine1967 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-26-09 01:59 PM
Response to Original message
33. THIS POST Right here...
This is journalism.

This is what the media should be doing. This is what should happen AFTER the kind of interview that Nora did.

These are the kind of things that should have been asked DURING the interview.

THANK YOU. K&R and bookmarked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sandrine for you Donating Member (635 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-26-09 02:49 PM
Response to Original message
34. Thank's !! Good work!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Whoa_Nelly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-26-09 03:27 PM
Response to Original message
35. KR&B!
:kick: Rec & B'kmarked! :thumbsup:


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalLovinLug Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-26-09 05:07 PM
Response to Original message
36. kick
great op
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kahoneez Donating Member (24 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-26-09 05:11 PM
Response to Original message
37. U can't train your lungs to think it's not DROWNING !
It's non nonsensical , even not being a doctor I know the lungs react to water boarding(torture) the same way as being drowned , its an involuntary reaction . Besides the rights timetables are so far off , it shows how desperate they are to protect the bush regime and themselves
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Seldona Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-26-09 07:37 PM
Response to Original message
38. Great refutation.
How these people sleep at night I will never know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-26-09 07:39 PM
Response to Original message
39. knr
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dae Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-26-09 07:43 PM
Response to Original message
40. Outstanding post, thank you for all of you effort...
and insight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LibertyLover Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Apr-26-09 09:12 PM
Response to Original message
41. Several years ago Lizzie baby worked at International Finance Corporation
and I knew her slightly. As far as I was concerned, she was a waste of time. She didn't want to do her work, just plan parties for the GOP. Eventually that's what she got to do - while others did the work she was supposed to be doing. Most of us were happy when she moved on to State Department - let them have her. I'm not surprised that she is throwing bullsh&t like this around.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Sep 20th 2020, 12:27 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC