<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Reality Liberation Front &#187; Tom Ridge</title>
	<atom:link href="http://realityliberationfront.com/tag/tom-ridge/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://realityliberationfront.com</link>
	<description>Freeing Reality From The Chains Of Subjectivity Since 1987</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Sep 2010 14:11:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Chaos Theory Edition:  More Death, Heckling the Disabled, and Indoctrination</title>
		<link>http://realityliberationfront.com/chaos-theory-edition-more-death-heckling-the-disabled-and-indoctrination/</link>
		<comments>http://realityliberationfront.com/chaos-theory-edition-more-death-heckling-the-disabled-and-indoctrination/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Sep 2009 21:12:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>TBartine</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Alberto Gonzales]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[death panels]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Frank Pallone]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Governor Mike Huckabee]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health Care]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jenna Hager]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Maria Batiromo]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pat Buchanan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[President Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rachel Maddow]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Representative Bachmann]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Representative Jenkins]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Representative Olsen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Representative Weiner]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Robert McDonnell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Senator Kennedy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tom Ridge]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://realityliberationfront.com/?p=304</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Well, yours truly has been down for the count all week with the nasty head cold making the rounds in Nashville...so let's try to wrap things up with our weekly edition of Chaos Theory...here's what I've collected over the last five days.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, yours truly has been down for the count all week with the nasty head  cold making the rounds in Nashville&#8230;so let&#8217;s try to wrap things up with our  weekly edition of <em>Chaos Theory</em>&#8230;</p>
<p><em>&#8230;here&#8217;s what I&#8217;ve collected over the last five days</em>:</p>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>HEALTHCARE -- THE DEBATE THAT&#8217;S KILLING US SLOWLY:</strong></span></p>
<ul>
<li>Despite the thorough, public debunking of the ridiculous &#8220;<em>death panel</em>&#8221;  	claims, and the fact that even the right-wing press outlets aren&#8217;t  	mentioning the conspiracy theory anymore, some politicians <strong>may not have  	received the memo</strong>.  Representative Pete Olson (R-TX) was holding a  	recent town hall meeting, and he told the crowd about a girl named &#8220;<em>Britney</em>.&#8221;   	The girl&#8217;s unborn child was found to have a heart defect&#8230;and despite her  	best efforts she couldn&#8217;t find a doctor to treat her baby until she located  	a remote, out-of-state specialist.  Olson goes on to claim&#8230;that in  	any proposed &#8220;<em>government-run</em>&#8221; system, the baby would have died for  	lack of treatment.  The crowd, who apparently <strong>HAD</strong> received the  	memo&#8230;and who knew that these types of claims are false and intended only  	to scare them&#8230;proceeded to boo Representative Olson, and shouted, &#8220;<strong>Oh  	Jesus Christ, that&#8217;s terrible</strong>,&#8221; and, &#8220;<strong>That&#8217;s not true!</strong>&#8220;  To  	these people, Olson nonsensically responded, &#8220;<strong>For those of you who say  	it&#8217;s not true, don&#8217;t talk to me, talk to Britney</strong>.&#8221;  Wait&#8230;<em>what</em>?</li>
</ul>
<p><span class="youtube">
<object width="425" height="355">
<param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/x_MvNF2GUE0&amp;color1=d6d6d6&amp;color2=f0f0f0&amp;border=0&amp;fs=1&amp;hl=en&amp;autoplay=0&amp;showinfo=0&amp;iv_load_policy=3&amp;showsearch=0?rel=1&amp;feature=player_embedded" />
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" />
<embed wmode="transparent" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/x_MvNF2GUE0&amp;color1=d6d6d6&amp;color2=f0f0f0&amp;border=0&amp;fs=1&amp;hl=en&amp;autoplay=0&amp;showinfo=0&amp;iv_load_policy=3&amp;showsearch=0?rel=1&amp;feature=player_embedded" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="355"></embed>
<param name="wmode" value="transparent" />
</object>
</span><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_MvNF2GUE0">www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_MvNF2GUE0</a></p></p>
<ul>
<li>Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee&#8230;not only didn&#8217;t get the &#8220;<em>mentioning-death-panels-now-makes-you-look-like-an-idiot</em>&#8221;  	memo, but he also decided that merely repeating a claim that has been proven  	false&#8230;<em>wasn&#8217;t quite tacky enough</em>.  So Huckabee 	<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/28/huckabee-kennedy-would-ha_n_271605.html"> went on his radio show</a> and suggested that the recently departed Senator  	Kennedy&#8230;would have been urged to &#8220;<strong>go home to take pain pills and die</strong>&#8221;  	under Obama&#8217;s reform plan.  And we&#8217;ll add some more &#8220;<em>tackiness  	points</em>&#8221; since Huckabee, just last week, chided Democrats for what he  	perceived as them using Ted Kennedy&#8217;s death to advance the cause of reform.  	<strong>Oh Mike: </strong> it&#8217;s just as sick to use his name <strong>AGAINST</strong> reform&#8230;especially when you consider health care reform was his <strong>LIFELONG</strong> goal.</li>
<li>Generally, I don&#8217;t pass on &#8220;<em>moving stories that explain the need for  	Health Care Reform.</em>&#8220;  Except, in this case, the story is a lot more  	&#8220;<em>illuminating</em>&#8221; than it is &#8220;<em>moving</em>,&#8221; and it represents yet  	another deficiency of our current system that most people are not aware of.   	You probably <span style="text-decoration: underline;">did</span> know, that nearly 68% of all bankruptcies in America  	result from medical costs.  What you may not know&#8230;is that many  	divorces are also caused by a mixture of financial and medical necessity.   	Case in point, 	<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/30/opinion/30kristof.html?_r=1">read  	this story</a>&#8230;<strong>it&#8217;s actually quite common:</strong> husband develops  	debilitating disease, doctors shock wife by suggesting she immediately get a  	divorce or she will lose everything, wife consults lawyers who confirm what  	the doctors are saying, wife has a terrible choice to make&#8230;leave her  	husband or lose all their savings, retirement, and property.</li>
<li><strong>Interesting:</strong> I&#8217;m first to admit that I am no expert on  	taxes.  But it is interesting to note, 	<a href="http://www.newsweek.com/id/214267?from=rss">as this columnist does</a>,  	that while Republicans have been heavily utilizing the &#8220;<em>health care  	reform will urge grandma to die sooner</em>&#8221; attack&#8230;many past tax bills (<em>sponsored  	by Republicans, and notably one Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA)</em>) have done  	just that:  <strong>urged grandma to die sooner</strong>.  In addition to  	initiating tax changes that penalize seniors for living longer, Republicans  	have supported companies that swindled seniors out of their retirement money  	(<em>they dismiss it as &#8220;that&#8217;s the way the free market cookie crumbles!&#8221;</em>),  	and they refuse to let more money go into Alzheimer&#8217;s and Parkinson&#8217;s  	research.</li>
<li><strong>And Jesus Shakes His Head, Woefully:</strong> At Congressman Frank  	Pallone&#8217;s (D-NJ) town hall, a woman was attempting to describe her  	situation&#8230;from her wheelchair, she told the congressman that she had &#8220;<strong>two  	incurable auto-immune diseases.</strong>&#8220;  As the woman continued,  	anti-reform members of the crowd&#8230;started heckling her.  I&#8217;m just  	guessing that most of these hecklers would call themselves &#8220;<em>Christians</em>&#8220;&#8230;I&#8217;m  	also guessing that Jesus might have a problem with that.</li>
</ul>
<p><span class="youtube">
<object width="425" height="355">
<param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/QkrW22u7SwU&amp;color1=d6d6d6&amp;color2=f0f0f0&amp;border=0&amp;fs=1&amp;hl=en&amp;autoplay=0&amp;showinfo=0&amp;iv_load_policy=3&amp;showsearch=0?rel=1" />
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" />
<embed wmode="transparent" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/QkrW22u7SwU&amp;color1=d6d6d6&amp;color2=f0f0f0&amp;border=0&amp;fs=1&amp;hl=en&amp;autoplay=0&amp;showinfo=0&amp;iv_load_policy=3&amp;showsearch=0?rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="355"></embed>
<param name="wmode" value="transparent" />
</object>
</span><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkrW22u7SwU">www.youtube.com/watch?v=QkrW22u7SwU</a></p></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Most Lopsided Interview This Week:</strong> On MSNBC, Representative  	Anthony Weiner (D-NY) and CNBC&#8217;s anchor Maria Bartiromo were on as guests,  	to discuss Health Care Reform.  From early in the interview, it is  	apparent that Weiner appeared more than a bit better versed on the  	subject&#8230;but the best moment occurred when Bartiromo mocks Weiner&#8217;s support  	of Medicare, snapping, &#8220;<strong>How come you don&#8217;t use it [Medicare]? You don&#8217;t  	have it. How come you don&#8217;t have it?</strong>&#8220;  Representative  	Weiner&#8230;points out that he is only 45, to which Bartiromo lamely retorts, &#8220;<strong>Yeah,  	c&#8217;mon&#8230;</strong>&#8220;</li>
</ul>
<p><span class="youtube">
<object width="425" height="355">
<param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/nfv_KeKRsBo&amp;color1=d6d6d6&amp;color2=f0f0f0&amp;border=0&amp;fs=1&amp;hl=en&amp;autoplay=0&amp;showinfo=0&amp;iv_load_policy=3&amp;showsearch=0?rel=1" />
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" />
<embed wmode="transparent" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/nfv_KeKRsBo&amp;color1=d6d6d6&amp;color2=f0f0f0&amp;border=0&amp;fs=1&amp;hl=en&amp;autoplay=0&amp;showinfo=0&amp;iv_load_policy=3&amp;showsearch=0?rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="355"></embed>
<param name="wmode" value="transparent" />
</object>
</span><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfv_KeKRsBo">www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfv_KeKRsBo</a></p></p>
<ul>
<li>Word is now coming out of the White House, via correspondence with  	Health Care Advocacy groups, that the administration may be abandoning its  	fight for the public option and several other <strong>KEY</strong> elements of the  	reform bill.  While some White House insiders seem to support the idea  	that &#8220;<em>some bill, even a bad bill, is better than no bill</em>&#8220;&#8230;too many  	people disagree.  House Speaker Pelosi 	<a href="http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/26742.html">has chosen to  	side</a> with the caucus of Democratic Progressives who are saying that they 	<strong>WILL NOT</strong> support a bill that does not include the public option.   	Representative Weiner 	<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/04/anthony-weiner-obama-hasn_n_277640.html"> has made his own claims</a>, that these compromises represent a failure of  	leadership on the part of the President&#8230;<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/03/olbermann-obama-could-fac_n_277075.html">and  	as some point out</a>, if &#8220;<strong>change we can believe in</strong>&#8221; becomes &#8220;<strong>change  	we can barely stomach</strong>,&#8221; Obama could face challenges in the next  	primaries from Democrats claiming that they would show a bit more backbone  	if given the majority in both houses of Congress.  <strong>I think the votes  	are in: </strong> if the majority of the public wants reform and the public  	option to be a part of that reform, and you control all of Congress, and all  	the Republican minority promises is dissent&#8230;then you really have no excuse  	for not going to the mat, fighting for the best reform possible.</li>
</ul>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>POLITICIANS BEHAVING BADLY:</strong></span></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Stand Back, Genius At Work:</strong> Robert F. McDonnell is a  	candidate for Virginia Governor, and in a recent speech, he proudly  	mentioned his Master&#8217;s thesis, which he wrote while attending an evangelical  	college in Virginia Beach.  <span style="text-decoration: underline;">Apparently</span>&#8230;McDonnell didn&#8217;t think  	anyone 	<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/29/AR2009082902434_pf.html"> would bother to look up the thesis</a> in question&#8230;<strong>but they did</strong>.   	The thesis, which outlines the steps McDonnell suggested the Republican  	Party should take to &#8220;<em>protect</em>&#8221; families&#8230;says that feminists and  	working women are &#8220;<strong>detrimental</strong>&#8221; to families, contraception for  	unmarried people is &#8220;<strong>illogical</strong>,&#8221; and that government should show  	clear preference for married people and not &#8220;<strong>cohabitators, homosexuals or  	fornicators.</strong>&#8220;  Hear that <strong>WHOOSHING</strong> sound? Enjoy your trip  	down the political whirlpool, Mr. McDonnell.</li>
<li>First Representative Lynn Jenkins (R-KS) made the mistake of referring  	to Republican&#8217;s search for a viable presidential candidate as the quest to  	find &#8220;<strong>The Great White Hope.</strong>&#8220;  Jenkins then responded to the  	resulting outcry, by stating that she had no idea that this was a racist  	sentiment referring back to the search for a white boxer who could defeat  	black boxing champion, Jack Johnson.  <strong>THEN</strong>&#8230;we find out that  	back in <strong>JULY</strong> (<em>that&#8217;s right, just a few months ago</em>), Jenkins  	supported a resolution that explicitly <strong>STATED</strong> the history of the  	phrase: &#8220;<strong>Whereas the victory by Jack Johnson over Tommy Burns prompted a  	search for a White boxer who could beat Jack Johnson, a recruitment effort  	that was dubbed the search for the &#8216;great white hope.&#8217;</strong>&#8220;  Jenkins  	new position?  She 	<a href="http://www.ottawaherald.com/story/082809jenkinsvote">says she never  	read the resolution</a>, choosing to look like an incompetent legislator,  	rather than a racist.</li>
<li>Minnesota Republican Representative Michele Bachmann is now well known  	for making odd and inflammatory statements (<em>most recently she proposed  	that health care legislation should be defeated with &#8220;fasting and prayer&#8221;</em>).   	But now, <a href="http://mediamattersaction.org/blog/200909040004">she has  	her own theory</a> why Democrats, and apparently most of her constituents,  	want her out of office: &#8220;<strong>Also with women politicians, </strong><strong>they  	want to make sure no women, no woman becomes president before a Democrat  	woman, and so they&#8217;re doing everything they can to, I think, sabotage women  	like Sarah Palin, perhaps women like myself,</strong><strong> or similarly  	situated women, to make sure that we don&#8217;t have a prominent national voice.   	But the thing is, the people in our country, they don&#8217;t care who the voice  	is, they just want someone, they want to know that someone is speaking out  	for them against what will certainly bring about the destruction of our  	great country if we continue to go down the Obama path.</strong>&#8220;   	Yeah&#8230;it&#8217;s the <strong>DEMOCRATS</strong> who have such a pronounced diversity  	problem&#8230;</li>
</ul>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>GHOSTS OF OUR PAST:</strong></span></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Flip-Flop Number One:</strong> President Obama has now reversed his  	initial position, and has said that the White House visitor records 	<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/04/white-house-visitor-logs_n_277227.html"> will be released</a> to the public, in a clear reversal of Bush policy.   	That&#8217;s great&#8230;one down, eleven to go.  Next we&#8217;d like to see an end to  	renditions, warrantless wiretaps, signing statements, excessive use of the &#8220;<em>State  	Secrets</em>&#8221; defense, and refusal of Due Process to detainees&#8230;</li>
<li><strong>Flip-Flop Number Two:</strong> Former Secretary of Homeland Defense  	Tom Ridge stunned many when his book was released and clearly indicated that  	he had been suspiciously pressured to raise the Terror Alert Level.  He  	surprised everyone 	<a href="http://tpmlivewire.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/09/ridge-dont-believe-everything-you-read----especially-on-my-book-jacket.php?ref=fpb"> even more</a> when he went on Rachel Maddow&#8217;s show, denied that the claim  	was true, said that any suspicions he had in the past he now knew were false  	(<em>but not for any particular reason&#8230;he just &#8220;knows&#8221;</em>),  he  	criticizes the government response to Katrina&#8230;then defends it, and he says  	that even though every reason the government gave us for going into Iraq has  	been proven false, it&#8217;s &#8220;<em>ok</em>&#8221; because it was really always about  	bringing democracy to the country.  Rachel&#8230;<strong>seemed to take issue&#8230;</strong></li>
</ul>
<p><span class="youtube">
<object width="425" height="355">
<param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/qIzsZ3g7dTU&amp;color1=d6d6d6&amp;color2=f0f0f0&amp;border=0&amp;fs=1&amp;hl=en&amp;autoplay=0&amp;showinfo=0&amp;iv_load_policy=3&amp;showsearch=0?rel=1" />
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" />
<embed wmode="transparent" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/qIzsZ3g7dTU&amp;color1=d6d6d6&amp;color2=f0f0f0&amp;border=0&amp;fs=1&amp;hl=en&amp;autoplay=0&amp;showinfo=0&amp;iv_load_policy=3&amp;showsearch=0?rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="355"></embed>
<param name="wmode" value="transparent" />
</object>
</span><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIzsZ3g7dTU">www.youtube.com/watch?v=qIzsZ3g7dTU</a></p></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Flip-Flop Number Three:</strong> Former Attorney General Alberto  	Gonzales&#8230;<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/03/alberto-gonzales-flip-flo_n_276899.html">raised  	a few eyebrows</a> when he stated that he approved of Attorney General  	Holder&#8217;s investigation into interrogators who exceeded the bounds of the  	controversial DOJ memos justifying torture: &#8220;.<strong>..if people go beyond that,  	I think it is legitimate to question and examine that conduct to ensure  	people are held accountable for their actions, even if it&#8217;s action in  	prosecuting the war on terror.</strong>&#8220;  It took about a day for Alberto to  	change his mind: &#8220;<strong>I don&#8217;t support the investigation by the department  	because this is a matter that has already been reviewed thoroughly and  	because I believe that another investigation is going to harm our  	intelligence gathering capabilities and that&#8217;s a concern that&#8217;s shared by  	career intelligence officials and so for those reasons I respectfully  	disagree with the decision.</strong>&#8220;  I don&#8217;t know how he keeps from  	getting whiplash&#8230;my neck hurts just reading this.</li>
</ul>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>THE MEDIA -- HACKS, PUNDITS, AND OTHER INVETERATE LIARS:</strong></span></p>
<ul>
<li>The <em>Today Show</em> <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/30/today-show-hires-jenna-bu_n_272220.html"> has a new hire</a>:  Jenna Hager, formerly Jenna Bush, daughter of  	former President George Bush.  Ok&#8230;yes, she has knowledge of &#8220;<em>living  	in the White House</em>,&#8221; but that does not equal &#8220;<em>White House insider  	knowledge.</em>&#8220;  She is a fledgling school teacher&#8230;but that does not  	make her an &#8220;<em>expert on education.</em>&#8220;  Lastly, besides her apparent  	expertise in <strong>NOTHING</strong>, I&#8217;m just not certain that hiring the daughter  	of one of the most partisan presidents in recent history will result in  	anything resembling unbiased, non-partisan journalism.  <em>Just my  	prediction&#8230;</em></li>
<li><strong>How Does This Guy Stay On Television:</strong> Pat Buchanan&#8230;it&#8217;s  	not bad enough that he was part of Nixon&#8217;s cabal&#8230;or that when running for  	president he revealed a deep-seated anger towards immigrants&#8230;and later as  	a columnist and MSNBC commentator, he voiced racist and anti-Semitic  	sentiments&#8230;but now, his recent column &#8220;<em>Did Hitler Want War</em>,&#8221;  	Buchanan seems to defend the worst genocidal dictator in world history.  	<a href="http://buchanan.org/blog/did-hitler-want-war-2068">You be the judge</a>.   	When a man has an 	<a href="http://www.adl.org/special_reports/buchanan_own_words/buchanan_intro.asp"> entire page</a> dedicated to him on the Anti-Defamation League&#8217;s (ADL)  	website, maybe he should not be featured so prominently in the mainstream  	media&#8230;</li>
</ul>
<p><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>MISCELLANY</strong></span>:</p>
<ul>
<li><em>Has everybody lost their minds? </em> When I heard that the  	President was going to address the nation&#8217;s schoolchildren, I thought &#8220;<em>big  	deal.</em>&#8220;  Presidents do this.  All presidents&#8230;both parties.   	They say &#8220;<em>hey, stay in school&#8230;don&#8217;t do drugs&#8230;you could be presidents  	someday&#8230;wink.</em>&#8220;  Well, the conservative media, and the GOP,  	specifically the Florida Republican Party, have decided that the message is  	an attempt to&#8230;wait for it&#8230;<strong>INDOCTRINATE OUR CHILDREN</strong>.  They  	say kids, &#8220;<strong>will be forced to watch the president justify his plans for  	government-run health care, banks, and automobile companies, increasing  	taxes on those who create jobs, and racking up more debt than any other  	president.</strong>&#8220;  Of course&#8230;this is <strong>BEYOND</strong> ridiculous, and  	Politifact.com 	<a href="http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/sep/02/republican-party-florida/republican-party-florida-says-obama-will-indoctrin/"> has chosen</a> to give the myth the much coveted &#8220;<em>Pants On Fire</em>&#8221;  	designation.</li>
</ul>
<p>That brings this week to a much-needed close.  Have a wonderful Labor  Day weekend, and we&#8217;ll see you next week.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://realityliberationfront.com/chaos-theory-edition-more-death-heckling-the-disabled-and-indoctrination/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Torture, And The Cheney Denial Trifecta: Dick, Liz, and Mary</title>
		<link>http://realityliberationfront.com/torture-and-the-cheney-denial-trifecta-dick-liz-and-mary/</link>
		<comments>http://realityliberationfront.com/torture-and-the-cheney-denial-trifecta-dick-liz-and-mary/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Aug 2009 21:03:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>TBartine</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Andrew Sullivan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Attorney General Holder]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chris Wallace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CIA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dan Froomkin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dick Cheney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Donald Rumsfeld]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[enhanced interrogation techniques]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Grover Norquist]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Harriet Myers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Inspector General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[John Ashcroft]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Karl Rove]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Liz Cheney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mary Cheney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[President Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rick Renzi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rob Portman]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sam Donaldson]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Senator McCain]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tom Ridge]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[torture]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://realityliberationfront.com/?p=300</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[After weeks dominated by the subject of health care reform, one specter from the recent past has raised its head once again:  The Bush administration's politicization of our nation's security. So, the conversation begins anew, and with fresh, damning information...here's how it's going so far (there are some real surprises).]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>After weeks dominated by the subject of health care reform, one specter from  the recent past has raised its head once again:  <strong>The Bush administration&#8217;s  politicization of our nation&#8217;s security</strong>.  Not long ago, the torture debate  <em>had reached an  impasse</em>:  Attorney General Holder and President Obama seemed satisfied with  taking the position that CIA interrogators and contractors who tortured  prisoners under the guidelines provided in the Department of Justice  memos&#8230;even though the memos are <strong>LEGALLY UNSOUND</strong> and self-serving&#8230;were acting  in &#8220;<em>good faith</em>&#8221; and would not be investigated or prosecuted.  On a broader  note, even though it was suspected that the Bush administration manipulated the  law, the media, and the public in order to advance their political agendas and  to pursue extra-legal enforcement methods&#8230;Holder and Obama seemed determined  to let that sleeping dog lie as well.</p>
<p><strong>Then, two documents changed everything:</strong></p>
<p><strong>1 -</strong> <span style="text-decoration: underline;">The Inspector General&#8217;s Report on CIA Interrogations</span>:  <a href="http://luxmedia.vo.llnwd.net/o10/clients/aclu/IG_Report.pdf">The report  is quite clear</a>&#8230;our interrogators used means of torture <strong>FAR</strong> outside even  the egregious amount supported by the DOJ memos.  They threatened to kill  detainees, and put guns and even a power drill to detainees&#8217; heads&#8230;<em>this is  illegal</em>.  They threatened to bring in detainees&#8217; wives and children, and to  rape them or kill them in front of the detainees&#8217; eyes&#8230;<em>also illegal</em>.  They kept them  in filthy diapers for extended periods&#8230;induced hypothermia&#8230;induced blackouts  by cutting off blood flow to the prisoners&#8217; brains&#8230;struck them with knees and  rifle butts&#8230;deprived them of sleep for days&#8230;oh, <strong>AND</strong> they waterboarded them,  some of them repeatedly.  AG Holder finally had no choice, and appointed a Special  Prosecutor.</p>
<p><strong>2 -</strong> <span style="text-decoration: underline;">Former Secretary of Homeland Security Tom Ridge&#8217;s Book</span>:  Once a  symbol for the domestic front of the Bush &#8220;<em>War On Terror,</em>&#8221; Tom Ridge&#8217;s book,  &#8220;<em>The Test of Our Times: America Under Siege,</em>&#8221; <a href="http://www.usnews.com/blogs/washington-whispers/2009/08/19/tom-ridge-on-national-security-after-911.html"> clearly paints a picture</a> of the manipulation of terror alerts for political  purposes.  He was the Secretary of Homeland Security&#8230;but wasn&#8217;t even  invited to National Security Council Meetings.  He was deliberately kept  uninformed by the FBI.  Essentially&#8230;he was told by Bush&#8217;s cabinet what  they wanted him to say, what to do, and what not to do.  He writes of one  particular &#8220;l<em>ast straw</em>:&#8221;  Attorney General Ashcroft asks Ridge to raise the  Terror Alert Level and to release an tape of Bin Laden criticizing Bush.   Ridge knew that there had been more than 20 tapes since 9/11&#8230;and none of them contained  any threats worth releasing.  Ridge also knew, that every time he raised  the Alert Level, Bush received a boost in the polls&#8230;and that the political  timing for a boost was very evident in this case.  Ridge and his department  denied the request, only to be pressured further by Ashcroft and Defense  Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.</p>
<p>So, the conversation begins anew, and with fresh, damning information&#8230;<strong>here&#8217;s  how it&#8217;s going so far (<em>there are some real surprises</em>)</strong>:</p>
<ul>
<li>Tom Ridge&#8230;seems to be having second thoughts.  Having recovered  	fully from his momentary lapse of honesty, Ridge 	<a href="http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-08-30-tom-ridge_N.htm?csp=34"> now tells USA Today</a> that he was in no way squeezed to raise the Alert  	Level, nor is he critical of the previous administration&#8217;s decision to keep  	him in the dark:  &#8220;<strong>I was never pressured&#8230;I&#8217;m not second-guessing my  	colleagues&#8230;</strong>&#8220;  You know, it&#8217;s bad enough if you say one thing on  	Monday and the opposite on Tuesday&#8230;but you&#8217;ll probably only get in trouble  	if somebody pulls up the video clips of both speeches.  In this  	case&#8230;you wrote it in your <strong>BOOK</strong>, Ridge&#8230;which is it:  <span style="text-decoration: underline;">is the book a  	lie, or what you are telling us now?</span></li>
<li>But Ridge isn&#8217;t the only Republican to accuse the Bush White House of  	releasing information for political purposes:  former Representative  	Rick Renzi&#8217;s attorneys have 	<a href="http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/08/renzi_lawyers_argue_bush_doj_leaked.php"> filed a motion</a>, calling for the government to show why it should not be  	held in contempt for releasing details of a grand jury investigation into  	Renzi, in an attempt to save his struggling re-election campaign.  Up  	until then, it had always been the DOJ&#8217;s policy not to comment on ongoing  	investigations&#8230;until Harriet Myers and Karl Rove approached them and told  	them to &#8220;<em>throw cold water</em>&#8221; on reports that Renzi was under investigation&#8230;   	which they did.  So, by our tally&#8230;that&#8217;s hiring and firing federal  	attorneys using a partisan &#8220;<em>litmus test</em>&#8220;&#8230;releasing the identity of an  	undercover CIA agent&#8230;and illegally releasing grand jury details for  	political purposes.  <strong><em>And the hits just keep on coming..</em></strong>.</li>
<li>Former VP Dick Cheney, now preparing for the upcoming promotion of his  	new book in earnest, responded as all would expect.  He called enhanced  	interrogation &#8220;<strong>absolutely essential</strong>,&#8221;  called the appointment of a  	Special Prosecutor to investigate our use of torture an &#8220;<strong>outrageous  	political act</strong>,&#8221; and said that on a personal level it &#8220;<strong>offends the hell out  	of me (Cheney)</strong>.&#8221;  Then, Cheney&#8230;appears to contradict himself.   	First he says: &#8220;<strong>We had a president of the United States, President Obama, tell us  	a few months ago there wouldn&#8217;t be an investigation.  Now, they get a  	little heat from the left wing of the Democratic Party and they are  	reversing course on that.</strong>&#8220;  Of course, even casual observers realize  	that the investigation has more to do with the release of the Inspector  	General&#8217;s report than it does &#8220;<em>pressure from Democrats</em>,&#8221; but it is what  	Cheney said next that seems more worthy of our attention: &#8220;<strong>The president is  	the chief law enforcement officer in the administration.  He is now  	saying, well, this isn&#8217;t anything he&#8217;s got to do with.</strong>&#8220;  Mr.  	Cheney&#8230;if you agree that the President is the &#8220;<em>chief law enforcement  	officer</em>&#8221; of the nation&#8230;and he is presented with clear, documented proof  	that acts were committed in violation with the Constitution and the laws of  	the land&#8230;then doesn&#8217;t <strong>HE HAVE</strong> to investigate it?  Otherwise&#8230;what  	kind of &#8220;<em>law enforcement officer</em>&#8221; would he be?</li>
</ul>
<p><span class="youtube">
<object width="425" height="355">
<param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/bzH2yvrvNW0&amp;color1=d6d6d6&amp;color2=f0f0f0&amp;border=0&amp;fs=1&amp;hl=en&amp;autoplay=0&amp;showinfo=0&amp;iv_load_policy=3&amp;showsearch=0?rel=1" />
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" />
<embed wmode="transparent" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/bzH2yvrvNW0&amp;color1=d6d6d6&amp;color2=f0f0f0&amp;border=0&amp;fs=1&amp;hl=en&amp;autoplay=0&amp;showinfo=0&amp;iv_load_policy=3&amp;showsearch=0?rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="355"></embed>
<param name="wmode" value="transparent" />
</object>
</span><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzH2yvrvNW0">www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzH2yvrvNW0</a></p></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Like Daddy, Like Daughter: </strong> Of course, we&#8217;ve also come to expect  	that Liz Cheney will defend any and all of her father&#8217;s actions.   	Unfortunately for Liz, she decided to do so on a panel that included Sam  	Donaldson, who was quick to point out that her logic is both flawed and  	self-serving:</li>
</ul>
<p><span class="youtube">
<object width="425" height="355">
<param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/fldR5NdSG9U&amp;color1=d6d6d6&amp;color2=f0f0f0&amp;border=0&amp;fs=1&amp;hl=en&amp;autoplay=0&amp;showinfo=0&amp;iv_load_policy=3&amp;showsearch=0?rel=1" />
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" />
<embed wmode="transparent" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/fldR5NdSG9U&amp;color1=d6d6d6&amp;color2=f0f0f0&amp;border=0&amp;fs=1&amp;hl=en&amp;autoplay=0&amp;showinfo=0&amp;iv_load_policy=3&amp;showsearch=0?rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="355"></embed>
<param name="wmode" value="transparent" />
</object>
</span><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fldR5NdSG9U">www.youtube.com/watch?v=fldR5NdSG9U</a></p></p>
<ul>
<li><strong>Cheney Denial Trifecta:</strong> Cheney&#8217;s other daughter, Mary, is unlikely  	to comment on the subject of enhanced interrogation&#8230;but appears to share  	her father&#8217;s penchant for denial.  I used to feel just terrible for  	Mary:  during the presidential campaigns, Dick Cheney was often asked  	about his positions towards gay rights, given that his daughter, Mary, is a  	lesbian.  I always thought it shameful that he chose not to defend his  	own daughter&#8217;s rights and equality.  	<a href="http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/08/31/mary-cheney-gave-1000-to-anti-gay-senate-hopeful/"> But now we find out</a>&#8230;that despite being a lesbian, in a lesbian partnership,  	and with adopted children&#8230;Mary Cheney donated to former Representative Rob  	Portman (R-OH), a GOP Senate hopeful.  Portman&#8230;is anti-gay marriage,  	and anti-gay adoption.  Maybe Dick just figured there was no need to  	defend his daughter&#8230;<span style="text-decoration: underline;">if she won&#8217;t even defend herself</span>&#8230;or maybe, it&#8217;s just  	another Cheney example of partisanship coming before what&#8217;s right.</li>
<li>In responding to Cheney&#8217;s positions&#8230;Senator John McCain (R-AZ) swung  	for the fences.  He said, &#8220;<strong>I think the interrogations were in violation  	of the Geneva Conventions and the convention against torture that we  	ratified under President Reagan.  I think these interrogations, once  	publicized, helped al Qaeda recruit. I got that from an al Qaeda operative  	in a prison camp in Iraq&#8230; I think that the ability of us to work with our  	allies was harmed. And I believe that information, according go the FBI and  	others, could have been gained through other members.</strong>&#8220;  Of course, then  	he qualified his remarks by adding, &#8220;<strong>I believe the president [Obama] was  	right when he said we ought to go forward and not back.</strong>&#8220;  I&#8217;ve said  	this before:  To admit that laws/treaties were broken, but then say there is  	no need pursue the legal investigation/trial process, violates not only our  	country&#8217;s laws, but also our values.</li>
</ul>
<p><span class="youtube">
<object width="425" height="355">
<param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/MD1x_aafc7Y&amp;color1=d6d6d6&amp;color2=f0f0f0&amp;border=0&amp;fs=1&amp;hl=en&amp;autoplay=0&amp;showinfo=0&amp;iv_load_policy=3&amp;showsearch=0?rel=1" />
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" />
<embed wmode="transparent" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/MD1x_aafc7Y&amp;color1=d6d6d6&amp;color2=f0f0f0&amp;border=0&amp;fs=1&amp;hl=en&amp;autoplay=0&amp;showinfo=0&amp;iv_load_policy=3&amp;showsearch=0?rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="355"></embed>
<param name="wmode" value="transparent" />
</object>
</span><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MD1x_aafc7Y">www.youtube.com/watch?v=MD1x_aafc7Y</a></p></p>
<ul>
<li>Summary (<em>my paraphrasing, not actual quotes</em>) of 	<a href="http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1919523,00.html">CIA  	claims</a> that McCain knew all about the torture they were about to commit:  	<strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">CIA:</span> </strong>&#8220;We told McCain and the others the six interrogation methods were were  	going to use.&#8221;  <strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">McCain spokesperson:</span> </strong>&#8220;Nuh uh!  McCain repeatedly  	questioned what you were going to do and never gave his approval.&#8221;   	<strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">CIA:</span> </strong>&#8220;Well&#8230;we weren&#8217;t really there for the legislators  	&#8216;approval&#8217;&#8230;just their feedback.  Some liked it&#8230;some didn&#8217;t.   	We were cool with that.&#8221;  <em>Why is this conversation so important?</em> Because Steven G. Bradbury, a deputy assistant attorney general, wrote his  	memo justifying torture, using the rationale that the methods were  	acceptable and legal because the ideas didn&#8217;t seem to &#8220;<strong>shock the conscience</strong>&#8221;  	of the legislators, and that is a legal standard related to the Fifth  	Amendment of the Constitution, which covers Due Process.  Perhaps the  	problem is that we need more legislators who have actual &#8220;<em>consciences</em>&#8221; to  	&#8220;<em>shock</em>.&#8221;</li>
<li><strong>Unlikely Advocate:</strong> Grover Norquist, president of <em>Americans for Tax  	Reform</em> and a leading conservative activist&#8230;<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/31/grover-norquist-torture-i_n_272785.html">thinks  	the investigations</a> into torture <strong>ARE A GOOD IDEA</strong>.  Of course his  	reasons are a bit suspect&#8230;he wants to be able to have the Obama  	administration investigated down the road: &#8220;<strong>Holder is making a decision that  	one administration should go back and second-guess another administration.  	Yes, it&#8217;s political but he is also opening the door to what will happen  	after Holder and Obama&#8217;s legacy here.  I think that someday when we  	have a different Justice Department, people need to go back and look at how  	all of this money in the stimulus package was paid. And who it went to. What  	about all of those secret meetings that were never transparent about who was  	going to get what?&#8230;The Bush administration started their administration  	foolishly, not seriously looking into the cash for pardons challenge that  	the Clinton administration had.  They were wrong to decide not to do  	that and I think that the next Republican administration will follow  	Holder&#8217;s path rather than the Bush path of the past.</strong>&#8220;  While his  	reasoning is certainly overtly political and almost sickeningly  	vindictive&#8230;he may be right on one level.  If <strong>ANY</strong> administration acts  	outside the law&#8230;shouldn&#8217;t the next administration investigate it, or  	should they just continue this tradition of a &#8220;<em>courteous disregard for  	previous illegal activity?</em>&#8220;  If an administration didn&#8217;t break any  	laws&#8230;what would they have to fear from an investigation?</li>
<li>Andrew Sullivan addresses part of the reason why what should be an  	exceedingly clear issue (<em>torture is both wrong and illegal, and we used  	torture</em>), has instead been allowed to become very muddied waters.  The 	<strong>MEDIA</strong>.  Sullivan takes Chris Wallace to task for completely &#8220;<em>softballing</em>&#8221;  	his interview with Dick Cheney 	<a href="http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/08/chris-wallace-a-teenage-girl-interviewing-the-jonas-brothers.html"> in his column</a>, hilariously titled: &#8220;<strong>Chris Wallace, A Teenage Girl  	Interviewing The Jonas Brothers.</strong>&#8220;  Sullivan lists all of the weak  	questions asked by Wallace, and then shares his two favorite exchanges:&#8221;<strong>My two favorite moments:</strong><br />
<blockquote><p><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">CHENEY</span>: I am going to &#8212; if I address that, I will address it in my  		book, Chris. </strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">WALLACE</span>: It is going to be a hell of a book. </strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">CHENEY</span>: It is going to be a great book.</strong></p></blockquote>
<p><strong>And then the apology for asking the questions Cheney wanted asked:</strong></p>
<blockquote><p><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">WALLACE</span>: Well, we want to thank you for talking with us and including  		in your private life putting up with an interview from the likes of me. </strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">CHENEY</span>: It&#8217;s all right. I enjoy your show, Chris. </strong></p>
<p><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">WALLACE</span>: Thank you very much, and all the best sir.</strong>&#8220;</p></blockquote>
</li>
<li><strong>Check This Out</strong>:  Dan Froomkin does a fairly 	<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/31/cheney-still-manipulating_n_273034.html"> thorough look</a> at the litany of public deceptions utilized by Dick Cheney  	over the years.  He includes a fascinating quote from 	<a href="http://obsidianwings.blogs.com/obsidian_wings/2009/08/the-method-of-cheneys-madness.html"> Obsidian Wings blogger publius</a>: &#8220;<strong>If you&#8217;ve noticed, Cheney tends to  	pop up in the aftermath of damning evidence. We just (re)learned, for  	instance, that our CIA agents murdered detainees, choked them, and  	threatened to rape their wives. Normally, you would think these revelations  	would give pause to even the most ardent Cheney supporters. But then Cheney  	comes along, and tries to reframe the whole story. His intended audience  	isn&#8217;t the nation as a whole, but <em>conservatives</em>. He wants to make  	sure that they view these stories through partisan-tinted lenses.</strong>&#8220;</li>
</ul>
<p>I will relay more news on this subject, and the subsequent denials from the  Cheney clan, as they are available.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://realityliberationfront.com/torture-and-the-cheney-denial-trifecta-dick-liz-and-mary/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Inspector General&#8217;s Torture Report:  Shocking Findings and Odd Reactions</title>
		<link>http://realityliberationfront.com/inspector-generals-torture-report-shocking-findings-and-odd-reactions/</link>
		<comments>http://realityliberationfront.com/inspector-generals-torture-report-shocking-findings-and-odd-reactions/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2009 20:57:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>TBartine</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Ari Fleischer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Attorney General Holder]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Department of Justice]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dick Cheney]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Inspector General]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[John Durham]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Keith Olbermann]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nuremberg]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[politicization]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[President Obama]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Representative Nadler]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Special Investigator]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tom Ridge]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[torture]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://realityliberationfront.com/?p=283</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Let's revisit the subject of the use of torture in American interrogations, given the release of the Inspector General's report and its shocking findings, the appointment of a Special Investigator, and the response from both sides of the aisle.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A government &#8220;<em>of the people</em><em>, by the </em><em>people</em><em>, for  the </em><em>people</em><em style="font-style: normal;">&#8221; can be a double-edged  sword.  Of course, in theory, it means that we, through the democratic  process, determine what the government should and shouldn&#8217;t do.   However&#8230;many people don&#8217;t take the time to realize that it also means that  we&#8230;are then responsible for what the government ultimately does.  That  is, of course, unless the government was concealing its actions from our view,  effectively removing our ability to consent/dissent.</em></p>
<p><em style="font-style: normal;">It&#8217;s a painful revelation, if one is  encountering it for the first time.  It means, for example, that if the  United States tortured detainees&#8230;that we are responsible for it.  That is  why it is so very difficult for some to even admit that waterboarding <strong>IS</strong>,  in fact, <strong>TORTURE</strong>.  Because if it is&#8230;then <strong>WE</strong> tortured  people.  While it is should be obvious to even the most simple-minded of  our citizenry that certain actions we engaged in were torture, were in violation  of more than one international treaty, were in violation of the articles of war,  and were in violation of our own federal statutes&#8230;<span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>some people simply  cannot bring themselves to admit it.</strong></span> It is simply too  embarrassing&#8230;too painful&#8230;that a nation once so noble, could have sunk so  low.  Even today, as I watched Fox News during lunch (</em><em>not my  channel choice, but c&#8217;est la vie</em><em style="font-style: normal;">), I watched  as a guest expert on their &#8220;</em><em>news</em><em style="font-style: normal;">&#8221;  program stated plainly that the actions detailed in the recently released  Inspector General&#8217;s findings were <strong>CLEARLY</strong> torture&#8230;only to have the host  of the show quickly assert that &#8220;</em><em>many people</em><em style="font-style: normal;">&#8221;  would not call the actions in the report &#8220;</em><em>torture</em><em style="font-style: normal;">.&#8221;   Perhaps&#8230;but those &#8220;</em><em>many people</em><em style="font-style: normal;">&#8221;  would be mistaken, and in the depths of profound self-deception.  In fact,  despite the fact that the Inspector General&#8217;s report describes in detail  thoroughly disgusting practices, that may well have exceeded even the level of  interrogation that was authorized&#8230;and even though the report noticeably does  not show that torture was necessary to produce results&#8230;Fox News&#8217; website <a href="http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/08/25/cia-interrogation-probe-reignites-national-security-debate-effectiveness/"> already claims</a> that the report may serve as proof of the torture&#8217;s efficacy:   &#8220;</em><strong>Two new documents released by the CIA on enhanced interrogation  techniques appear to declare a success efforts to gain intelligence on potential  terror attacks, leading opponents of an investigation into CIA interrogators  wondering about the Obama administration&#8217;s motives.</strong><em style="font-style: normal;">&#8220;</em></p>
<p><em style="font-style: normal;">So, let&#8217;s perform a quick examination of  recent events, </em><em>so that we can judge for ourselves</em><em style="font-style: normal;">:</em></p>
<ul>
<li><em style="font-style: normal;">The heavily-redacted Inspector General&#8217;s  	report (<a href="http://luxmedia.vo.llnwd.net/o10/clients/aclu/IG_Report.pdf">may  	be found here</a>), seems to make clear the following:  <strong>1-</strong> The  	measures were approved at a <strong>HIGH</strong> level  <strong>2-</strong> They  	threatened to execute detainees, held mock executions  <strong>3-</strong> They threatened to kill detainees&#8217; families, rape their mothers, their  	wives, and their children in front of them <strong>4-</strong> They applied  	pressure to detainees&#8217; carotid arteries, restricting bloodflow to the brain,  	causing unconsciousness  <strong>5-</strong> Detainees were struck in the  	torso with rifle butts and knees  <strong>6-</strong> Detainees were  	waterboarded in the style of Japanese prisoner torture <strong>7-</strong> Detainees were suspended by their arms to simulate shoulder dislocation  	<strong>8-</strong> Detainees were kept in soiled diapers for extended periods  	<strong>9-</strong> Detainees were stripped naked and doused with water on a  	bare floor to induce hypothermia  <strong>10-</strong> Detainees died as  	the result of their treatment  <strong>11-</strong> The interrogators  	received only two weeks training in how to perform interrogations, based on 	<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/24/torture-memos-used-overst_n_267607.html"> flawed/exaggerated study data</a> produced by the CIA  <strong>12-</strong> Detainees were tortured despite the absence of any information indicating  	that they were guilty of anything, or even that they knew anything  <strong> 13-</strong> Detainees were tortured who were likely to have provided  	information, perhaps even more reliable information without torture. </em><em>Salon</em><em style="font-style: normal;"> has 	<a href="http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2009/08/24/ig_report/">a  	good write-up</a> of the report, for those who do not wish to read (</em><em>or  	who cannot stomach</em><em style="font-style: normal;">) the actual report.</em></li>
<li><em style="font-style: normal;"><strong>Quick FYI:</strong> It is worth  	mentioning, related to the list of activities and revelations above, that  	both the torture measures <strong>AND</strong> the death threats&#8230;are violations of  	anti-torture laws.</em></li>
<li><em style="font-style: normal;">Faced with the Inspector General&#8217;s  	findings that the treatment of detainees was, at times, &#8220;</em><strong>unauthorized,  	improvised, inhumane</strong>&#8220;&#8230;Attorney General Holder was left with little  	choice but to appoint John Durham as a Special Investigator to look into the  	matter.  While Obama and Holder have both expressed that the wish for  	Durham to focus only on the interrogators, and only those that exceeded the  	Department of Justice authorization memos&#8230;it is worth mentioning that  	Durham will have the authority to pursue <strong>ANY</strong> relevant information <strong> WHEREVER</strong> it may lead.  <em>The Wall Street Journal</em> did an  	interesting short piece on Durham 	<a href="http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2009/08/24/john-durham-the-man-picked-to-investigate-the-cia/"> here</a>.  A registered Republican&#8230;<em>interesting choice.</em></li>
<li><strong>Mr. Pot&#8230;Meet Mr. Kettle:</strong> It is to be expected that the  	appointment of a Special Investigator would prompt statements from  	Republican leaders, accusing the administration of somehow &#8220;<em>making  	America less safe</em>.&#8221;  What was more than a little unexpected (<em>and  	deliciously ironic</em>) was former Vice President Cheney&#8217;s 	<a href="http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2009/08/cheney_statement_on_cia_docume.asp"> accusation</a> that the move was a sign of the administration attempting to  	&#8220;<strong>politicize</strong>&#8221; the Justice Department.  Yes&#8230;this, coming from  	the man who most hold ultimately responsible for the 	<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/06/24/justice-department-report_n_109033.html"> politically motivated hiring</a> and 	<a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUSN1714926720070819"> firing</a> of U.S. Attorneys&#8230;especially those thought to be &#8220;<em>lefties</em>,&#8221;  	or &#8220;<em>lesbians</em>,&#8221; or simply not in favor of pursuing unfounded,  	politically motivated investigations.  This claim is also  	interesting&#8230;coming from a man who many expect was the &#8220;<em>administration  	source</em>&#8221; of orders to use torture against detainees.</li>
<li><strong>Plus</strong>&#8230;Cheney is simply dead wrong.  Obama and the  	administration have somewhat disappointingly sided with <strong>NOT</strong> investigating the torture that occurred during the Bush years&#8230;it was  	exclusively 	<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/24/holder-to-appoint-special_n_267385.html"> Attorney General Holder&#8217;s call</a> to appoint an Investigator.</li>
<li>Cheney&#8230;<em>was not finished</em>.  He also 	<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/25/cheney-cia-interrogators_n_268049.html"> has stated</a> that these interrogators&#8230;&#8221;<strong>deserve our gratitude</strong>&#8221; and  	do not deserve &#8220;<strong>to be the targets of political investigations or  	prosecutions.</strong>&#8220;  Humor me, by following the logic:  if  	interrogators broke the laws (<em>even if ordered to do so&#8230;as being ordered  	to do so is <strong>NOT</strong> a legal defense</em>), and committed despicable acts  	of torture and coercion against American prisoners, sometimes even resulting  	in the prisoners&#8217; deaths&#8230;then according to Cheney, they deserve our &#8220;<em>gratitude</em>.&#8221;   	Is this how Americans are usually expected to treat members of our society  	that break the laws&#8230;even those committing murder?</li>
<li>Ari Fleischer, press secretary under Bush, 	<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/24/fleischer-torture-investi_n_267437.html"> said</a>, &#8220;<strong>I think the decision is disgusting.  It&#8217;s amazing to me  	that the people who kept us safe may now become the people our government  	prosecutes. There are plenty of real criminals out there -- it would be nice  	if the Justice Department went after them.</strong>&#8220;  First of all, Mr.  	Fleischer&#8230;there is little proof these people &#8220;<em>kept us safe</em>,&#8221; and  	there is, indeed, an argument to be made that their actions made both us and  	our soldiers <strong>LESS</strong> safe and resulted in the swelling of ranks within  	terrorist organizations.  Secondly, if they broke the law&#8230;then they 	<strong>ARE</strong> &#8220;<em>real criminals</em>,&#8221; as you say&#8230;that&#8217;s the definition of &#8220;<em>criminal</em>&#8221;  	we use here in the United States.</li>
<li>Meanwhile, some people&#8230;think the administration and the Justice  	Department have not gone far enough.  Representative Jerry Nadler, a  	senior Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, has 	<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/21/nadler-obama-violating-la_n_265124.html"> pointed out the simple truth</a>:  the President and other government  	officials have sworn oaths to defend the Constitution and laws of this  	country.  By willingly ignoring the growing mountain of evidence that  	serious crimes were committed&#8230;they are in violation of that oath.   	What is more, since under the anti-torture act of 1996, the United States  	government is <span style="text-decoration: underline;">obligated</span> to investigate accusations of torture&#8230;they  	are not only violating their oaths, but they are also violating the law  	which <strong>REQUIRES</strong> an investigation.  Until they do so&#8230;they are,  	in effect, criminals themselves.</li>
<li>It had long been speculated that the Bush Administration had &#8220;<em>manipulated</em>&#8221;  	terror alerts to their political advantage, following a simple formula:   	when something occurs that either hurts Republicans or helps  	Democrats&#8230;quickly distract the public with a new terrifying,  	unsubstantiated threat warning.  Now, Tom Ridge, former Secretary of  	Homeland Security&#8230;<a href="http://www.usnews.com/blogs/washington-whispers/2009/08/19/tom-ridge-on-national-security-after-911.html">has  	verified</a> that he was asked to change the alert level for political  	reasons: &#8220;<strong>Ridge was never invited to sit in on National Security Council  	meetings; was &#8216;blindsided&#8217; by the FBI in morning Oval Office meetings  	because the agency withheld critical information from him; found his urgings  	to block Michael Brown from being named head of the emergency agency blamed  	for the Hurricane Katrina disaster ignored; and was</strong> <strong>pushed to  	raise the security alert on the eve of President Bush&#8217;s re-election,  	something he saw as politically motivated and worth resigning over.</strong>&#8220;   	Congratulations to Keith Olbermann, who first succinctly reported on this  	pattern way back in 2006 in a segment titled the &#8220;<em>Nexus of Politics and  	Terror.</em>&#8220;  Here&#8217;s the clip:</li>
</ul>
<p><span class="youtube">
<object width="425" height="355">
<param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/s_M2E-IQNkg&amp;color1=d6d6d6&amp;color2=f0f0f0&amp;border=0&amp;fs=1&amp;hl=en&amp;autoplay=0&amp;showinfo=0&amp;iv_load_policy=3&amp;showsearch=0?rel=1" />
<param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" />
<embed wmode="transparent" src="http://www.youtube.com/v/s_M2E-IQNkg&amp;color1=d6d6d6&amp;color2=f0f0f0&amp;border=0&amp;fs=1&amp;hl=en&amp;autoplay=0&amp;showinfo=0&amp;iv_load_policy=3&amp;showsearch=0?rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="355"></embed>
<param name="wmode" value="transparent" />
</object>
</span><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_M2E-IQNkg">www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_M2E-IQNkg</a></p></p>
<p><strong>I&#8217;ve said this before:</strong> it is worth the shame, to get to the truth and  to reconcile with what <strong>WE CLAIM</strong> are our ideals.  If laws were  broken, and there is certainly enough evidence to indicate that they were, then  there <strong>MUST</strong> be an investigation.  If such an investigation reveals  individuals who broke the law, along with any individuals who ordered them to  break the law&#8230;those people should face judgment in a court of law.  Those  who claim to value our Constitution have no choice but to call for this&#8230;<em>or  to reveal themselves to be liars who care little for the Constitution and for  Due Process</em>.  <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/2150396/">In the  Nuremberg trials</a> following World War II&#8230;we clearly said it is <strong>NOT</strong> a  justification to perform crimes for the sake of one&#8217;s country&#8230;we clearly said  it is <strong>NOT</strong> a justification to commit crimes simply because you were  ordered to do so&#8230;we prosecuted the torturers, the people who watched them  torture and did nothing, the people who ordered them to torture, and the judges  who said it was legal for them to torture.  If we now shirk our  responsibilities under the law, and because this is a government &#8220;<em>of the  people</em><em>, by the </em><em>people</em><em>, for the </em><em>people</em><span style="font-style: normal;"><em>,</em>&#8220;</span> then we are <strong>ALL</strong> hypocrites, we are <strong>ALL</strong> criminals, and we are <strong> ALL</strong> torturers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://realityliberationfront.com/inspector-generals-torture-report-shocking-findings-and-odd-reactions/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

