Virginia Democratic Senator Jim Webb on AG Eric Holder's announcement that five of the 9-11 plotters will be tried in New York federal court…..

Those who have committed acts of international terrorism are enemy combatants, just as certainly as the Japanese pilots who killed thousands of Americans at Pearl Harbor. It will be disruptive, costly, and potentially counterproductive to try them as criminals in our civilian courts.

..[..]..

And we must be especially careful with any decisions to bring onto American soil any of those prisoners who remain a threat to our country but whose cases have been adjudged as inappropriate for trial at all. They do not belong in our country, they do not belong in our courts, and they do not belong in our prisons.

House representative Jim Moran (D-Va)….has a different take….

"They (Republicans, neo-cons, wingnuts) see this as an opportunity to demagogue," he said. "They will seize on any opportunity to do that, and that means they'll even take a stand that's un-American."

"It's un-American to hold anyone indefinitely without trial," Moran added. "It's against our principles as a nation."

"Opportunity to demagogue? Yep…like this….

Of all the mindless memes that non-reality-based adherents blare out like zombie pod people…..this one about "American soil" is the most ignorant. That's saying something….because the extreme right TeaBagger-FOX-Beck-Rush Group LLC….says a whole bunch of ignorant stuff on an hourly basis.

Giuliani is a discredited authoritarian moron, so it's easy to dismiss his grandstanding gibberish. But Rudy represents the FOX-BeckerHead position…so it will be the most prominent, because whatever FOX-Beckerheads spout is to be taken very Seriously by the Village. And, as the 9-12'ers and Rupert Murdoch have made clear, all wingnut-media decisions are for the purpose of "destroying Obama."

Remember, the only Job One there is for Republicans, Teabaggers, Drug Addicts on the Radio and myriad Wingnut Zoo Animals….is to bring about, as South Carolina cracker-senator Jim DeMint said…."Obama's Waterloo."

Now the analysis.

Senator Jim Webb is mistaken when he compares Japanese pilots during WW2 with 9-11 hijackers. Japanese pilots were operating under the authority of the Japanese Emperor. Japanese pilots during WW2 represented a country, a nation of people who declared war against America with the Pearl Harbor attack. WW2 was a war of nations. The militaries of the Axis powers were ordered by their nation's leaders to wage war on Allied nations.

9-11 Islamic hijackers represented who, exactly? A tiny international band of stateless anarchist criminals. No state or country sponsored the 9-11 hijackers. 9-11 hijackers did not act on the orders of a state dictator, politician, leader, or representative. Bin Laden's al-Qaeda carried out acts of violence for THEMSELVES….no one else.

Islamic extremists are seeking to make a symbolic "political statement" with their acts of violence. The entire point of killing others while killing yourself is to shock others into believing they are not safe. Japanese pilots who dropped bombs on Pearl Harbor were not making a "political statement"……they were beginning a monumental war of one nation against another. Japanese pilots were seeking to defeat the U.S. military, and thus America, the nation. Japanese pilots were not just trying to shock U.S citizens…..there was nothing symbolic about Pearl Harbor.

The second bit of "demagogic" nonsense-hype by American wingnuts only seeking Obama's demise by foolishly arguing we can't try 9-11 masterminds on "American soil"….is the, "they're too dangerous" to be housed in New York prisons…nonsense. There's no question the 9-11 plot was sinister and evil, but the five radical Islamic masterminds to be tried in New York federal court ain't squat compared to the most vicious, brutal, bloodthirsty deviants we currently have safely locked away in federal prisons, including, by the way, over 100 Islamic "terrorists."

To take the position that these five are too dangerous to bring onto "American soil" is, at best, a wingnut admission that America is weak, vulnerable, unsure of it's power and that the Constitution and set of laws which guide us are, somehow, deficient.

The final point I want to make is over the stupid claim that if we try 9-11 conspirators in New York…then New York will automatically become the focus of new terrorist attacks. Besides being another admission that America is just too weak or vulnerable to protect itself….this ignorant meme, meant only to diminish Obama's leadership, ignores the fact that America currently occupies two Muslim countries with some 200,000 U.S. soldiers. Daily, we are killing Afghani citizens. Also ignored is the fact that the American military has killed, at the very minimum, some 128,000 Iraqi citizens in our war of imperialistic aggression. 4 million Iraqis were displaced.

What more incentive would a Muslim crazy need to "focus" their extremist bile on the U.S.?

Here are the facts. George W. Bush, though he did not act on it, stated clearly that he would like to see Guantanomo closed. But Bush was a Republican president with very low approval ratings. In comes a popular Democratic President Obama who agrees with Bush's view of closing Guantanomo. If Obama succeeds in closing Guantanomo…..well, you know the wingnut drill….then America "fails."

The ignorant and disingenuous blatherings about not trying 9-11 conspirators on "American soil" is for the sole purpose of seeing Obama "fail."

Not that complicated.

Remember back in May of this year when the tender and delicate feelings of some Republicans were bruised when Speaker Nancy Pelosi said this….

Pelosi said that she was explicitly told in her September 2002 briefing that waterboarding was not used. We've since learned that Abu Zubaydah had been waterboarded 83 times by then.

She accused the agency of "misleading the Congress of the United States."

“We were told explicitly that waterboarding was not being used,” she said at the May press conference. “They [the CIA] misled us all the time.”

Ignoring, or forgetting, their own previous derogatory statements about the CIA, some Republican leaders bashed away at Pelosi for daring to speak the truth in public.

Senator Kit Bond (R-MO)….

“Speaker Pelosi should apologize to the CIA for calling them liars to protect her own hide,” Bond told CNSNews.com in a written statement Tuesday. “It’s up to Speaker Pelosi to come clean and set the record straight.”

Ohio's own embarassment, John Boehner (R-OH)…..

House Minority Leader John A. Boehner said that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi "ought to either present the evidence or apologize" in the wake of her comments that CIA officials misled her about the use of controversial interrogation techniques on terrorist suspects.

The Mighty Newton, currently in open opposition to wingnut darling Sarah Palin over an upstate New York congressional race, went further in his criticism of the House Speaker's CIA comments….

"She really disqualified herself to be the speaker," Gingrich said on "Good Morning America" today. "She has a unique responsibility for national security. … She made this allegation that smears everyone who's trying to defend her."
Leaving her in her place would be "very dangerous for the country," Gingrich added.

I know that Gingrich has occasions when he loses total control of his freak. That May outburst of freak over Pelosi's words about a lying CIA, I think, should be placed in Gingrich's top five "losing my freak" moments….you know, right up there with closing down the federal government in 1995.

Weren't those great wingnutty times back in May? Back in May it was steroid-enhanced faux-shock and sanctimony over Nancy Pelosi stating the obvious about the CIA.

There are now preliminary findings in a congressional investigation into the CIA's practice of giving misleading intelligence briefings to congressional members.

Intelligence subcommittee Chairwomen Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) and Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.) are leading an ongoing investigation into what they described as a practice of incomplete and often misleading intelligence briefings, which arose in the wake of CIA Director Leon Panetta’s June 24 admission that intelligence officials failed to notify Congress about a top-secret program to assassinate al Qaeda leaders.

..[..]..

In June, CIA Director Leon Panetta alerted the House Intelligence Committee about a top-secret program to assassinate top al Qaeda operatives that previously had not been disclosed to Congress. Later reports indicated that former Vice President Dick Cheney had ordered the CIA not to notify Congress of the program.

Panetta’s revelation appeared to bolster Pelosi’s statement from May, and Schakowsky and Eshoo identified “Director Panetta’s June 24 notification” as one of the…. instances linked to a complete communication breakdown between the intelligence community and Congress.

What are the other "instances" where the CIA misled Congress?

…the September 2002 briefing on enhanced interrogation techniques that became the basis for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) claim that the CIA lied to her.

A 2008 CIA Inspector General’s report determined that the agency withheld information from Congress relating to the shooting down of a plane carrying missionaries over Peru in 2001.

…the CIA may have failed to properly notify Congress about the 2005 destruction of videotapes recording the interrogation of al Qaeda operatives by intelligence officials…

So, what do we have here? Nancy Pelosi said that the CIA misleads Congress. Above are four prime examples from preliminary investigation findings that show the CIA….umm….misleading Congress. Pelosi spoke the truth back in May.

What of the over the top and obviously phony reaction of Republicans back in May to the true words of Pelosi? Those silly GOP'ers were just trying to protect The Dick from having his Willy-Wonka Torture Factory fully exposed. Those GOP torture defenders, faced with the existential threat that their former leaders, George and The Dick, could be charged with war crimes, immediately tried to change the subject, blur the story lines, "create reality", by manufacturing a faux-outrage narrative directing the Village attention away from Cheney and Bush, focusing on House Speaker Pelosi instead.

The Villagers, predictably, followed the lead of the "reality creators", the conventional wisdom, GOP narrative-builders,….helping GOP freaks smear a truth-telling Speaker Pelosi. GOP'ers raise freaky hell over some off-the-wall topic….and Knee Pad wearing Villagers instantly drop to their knees to replicate the freakdom, vicariously taking on the faux-outrage visage of the GOP freaks themselves.

And then we learn, also predictably, it was all a staged hoax.

Just as it's obvious that FOX "news" is not a news outlet, so too, the CIA routinely misleads Congress.

Glenn Greenwald…

"One of the most astounding feats in propaganda is how we've managed to take people who live in a country which we invade, bomb and occupy — and who fight against us because we're doing that — and call them "Terrorists," thereby "justifying" continuing to bomb and occupy their country further."

That sentence may not sound all that profound at first reading, but it is.

When the U.S. arbitrarily invaded Iraq, al-Qaeda "terrorists" were not there. Some came later to Iraq, especially following the release of the Abu Ghraib picnic photos. Neo-conservative propagandists, cheerled by Fox and Fiends, did their best to brainwash Americans into believing that shadowy Sunni figures or Shi-ite rebels (al-Sadr) or (Saddam's former) Baath Party remnants were each interchangeable surrogates for al-Qaeda. Even though Iraq had no al-Qaeda presence, no "terrorists", U.S. media quickly transplanted Sunni, Shi-ite, and/or Baath members into the role of the "terrorists."

America had attacked a sovereign nation where "terrorists" were not harbored, where al-Qaeda had no significant, if any, presence,….and within short-order of occupying a country that posed no threat to America, we were told that we were fighting the "terrorists" inside Iraq. Amazingly, Iraq had become the "central front of the war on terror." The lines were purposely blurred in explanation of who those "terrorists" were. Were they Sunni, were some Shi-ite, were they the remnants of Saddam's old political party? No one was sure…..and that, of course, was the point.

The same is true in Afghanistan, and has been for…..what is it now?…..over EIGHT years. al-Qaeda is a stateless, borderless group….so, in order to justify bringing the enormous U.S. military machine to the region in preparation for the already-determined plan to attack and occupy Iraq…..we needed a nation state as an enemy. The Taliban-ruled Afghanistan fit the bill. Those camel-riding Taliban were "harboring" those al-Qaeda, by god….quickly a whole new group of "terrorists" were created.

As Greenwald said, America attacks a country, occupies that country with it's military….an action that creates a resistance from natives of that country, whom we then quickly declare the "enemy" or the new "terrorists", which, completing the circle, justifies us continuing with our occupation.

The Reverend has often stated without apology that there is no "war on terror" and never has been. The U.S. "enemy" was/is al-Qaeda. After 9-11, the "war" America declared under Commander Guy, more appropriately, should have been called a "war on al-Qaeda"….but see?, that's too narrow, too specific. This American musical chairs style, changing-enemies game in Iraq and Afghanistan is often called a part of a non-existent "war on terror", but in all honesty, all it is, is an ongoing faux-justification to defend U.S. neo-conservative ideological and imperialistic goals for the region.
……….
Greenwald also writes about "why they hate us." The hopelessly incompetent Decider insisted that "they" hated us "because of our freedoms", a childish non-sequiter at best. A neo-conservative propaganda tool, at worst.

Overnight, a Fox and Fiends-led cottage industry developed complete with nonsensical "Islamofascist" name-calling and ridiculous notions of Islam's "real" goal to overthrow the "free" world. Americans were repeatedly told that Islamic radicals killed themselves in order to kill Americans because, somehow, America's freedom just drove them insane with rage. The Villagers all nodded, knowingly, in agreement.

Here's why "they" hate us…..

I also saw how some of the consequences of Washington’s antiterrorism policies had galvanized the Taliban. Commanders fixated on the deaths of Afghan, Iraqi and Palestinian civilians in military airstrikes, as well as the American detention of Muslim prisoners who had been held for years without being charged.

Here's why "they" hate us….

In 1996, Israeli jets bombed a UN building where civilians had taken refuge at Cana/ Qana in south Lebanon, killing 102 persons;…..

"On April 11, 1996, when Atta was twenty-seven years old, he signed a standardized will he got from the al-Quds mosque.l It was the day Israel attacked Lebanon in Operation grapes of Wrath. According to one of his friends, Atta was enraged,and by filling out his last testamentd during the attack he was offering his life in response."

A little over 5 years later, Atta led a group of hijackers who crashed planes into American buildings, killing 3000.

And here's why "they" will continue to hate us…

The 25 lines edited out of the court papers contained details of how Mr Mohamed's genitals were sliced with a scalpel and other torture methods so extreme that waterboarding, the controversial technique of simulated drowning, "is very far down the list of things they did," the official said.

A British High Court has just ruled that those 25 lines describing what CIA officials told British officials that they had done to an innocent Muslim detainee, Binyam Mohamed,…must be released to the world. Both George W. Bush and, now, Barack Obama, have tried, (up until now successfully) to keep examples of U.S. depravity and torture, like this one, secret.

But many middle eastern Muslims already know about U.S. torture and depravity. Many middle eastern Muslims know that we attack and occupy their countries with our military, then declare any subsequent native resistance, "enemies" and "terrorists." Many middle eastern countries already know that we will block any investigations into war crimes perpetrated against Gazans by Israelis…..or perpetrated by U.S. officials against Muslim detainees.

"They" already know all of this.

"They" are, just now, learning about this.

And that's why "they" hate us….and unless we change policy course….that's why "they" will continue to hate us.

I must say that I really haven't been surprised by the response of conservatives and Village-whore media to President Obama's winning of the Nobel Peace Prize yesterday. From the start of his presidency it has been made clear that the main objective of Obama's instant-opposition has been to see Obama "fail." Winning a prestigious award is not "failing"…..or is it?

For today's conservatives, Democrats have no legitimate right to govern, even when elected by a wide margin.

For today's Village-whore media, Democrats, even when elected by a wide margin by the American people, are still never to be taken seriously. Even though Americans elected Democrats by a wide margin to govern the nation, whore-media has spent the majority of their time this year consulting Republicans and conservatives, giving their criticisms, even when those criticisms are obviously batsh*t crazy, serious, thorough and repetitive consideration.

Just as today's conservatives and Republicans still refuse to recognize the disastrous policies and decisions of the previous Republican administration, whore-media still refuses to acknowledge their role in obediently assisting that administration in carrying out those disastrous policies and decisions.

Because, apparently, todays' conservatives and whore-media are no longer capable of self-reflection and objectivity, any and all "news" is interpreted as bad for Obama and the Democrats. Even when it's news all Americans should be proud of.

The "liberal" NY Times writer, Adam Nagourney, as scrawled across today's AB Journal front page headline, depicts the Nobel award to Obama as, "A Mixed Blessing."

Instead of recognizing the authentic relief and renewed hope the rest of the world is experiencing because of America's election of a thoughtful, intelligent, inclusive, diplomatic, war-is-not-the-first-option, leader, the "liberal" Times writer gives us this….

"It was a reminder of the gap between the ambitious promise of his words and his accomplishments."

..[..]..

"…it set off another round of mocking criticism from opponents who have chafed at what they see as the charmed and entitled rise of Obama."

…[...]..

"It was all but impossible to escape the fact that in the politically polarized world where Obama operates….. this was another complication."

…[...]..

" Fairly or not….. Obama has not gotten much done."

…[...]..

"… the White House clearly hopes that this is one celebration where the congratulations do not go on for too long."

..[...]..

"The image of Europe celebrating him as a global peacemaker recalled the period during the presidential race when Sen. John McCain's campaign portrayed Obama as a vapid celebrity playing to huge European crowds, a line of attack that left the normally sure-footed Obama team flummoxed."

You see? Obama being awarded with the Nobel is not only a bad thing for Obama, something America should be embarrassed or ashamed about, but it also only confirms conservative, Republican and Village criticisms of Obama.

And that's from the "liberal" NY Times.

In an AB Journal-front-page-headlined piece by a "liberal" NY Times writer….we are given the hapless RNC Chairman Michael Steele's response, the racist and sexist Rush Limbaugh's response and this response by the repellently assholian, Bob Kerry, former Democratic senator from Nebraska…..

"The Nobel Committee couldn't award the peace prize to the voters of the United States, but that's what they are doing,"

Excuse me Bob, what?

Speaking of assholian behavior…..watch only the first 45 seconds of a smiling, sophomoric, David Gregory, orgasmically mocking an American president winning the Nobel Peace Prize…..

Once again, this is not Beck or Limbaugh….this is the, you know, "liberal" NBC's Meet the Press moderator. Fluffy is gleeful in his mockery suggesting that because Obama was nominated for the award in February of this year that the entire process was laughable….despite the fact (as Matthews reminds him) that the decision was not made until September. Fluff, just like the Times' Nagourney, is completely oblivious to how the rest of the world regards the return of sanity to the American White House. To acknowledge the view of America by the rest of the world, to Villagers like Gregory and Nagourney, would be acknowledging their own slavish complicity with the totally disastrous "leadership" of the previous administration.

Often, my friend Da King, asks me what I mean when I talk about the Village or the Villagers.

Look no further for the answer.

_____________

For a non-Village, objective, historical look at Obama's Nobel Peace Prize watch this excellent segment from last night's Rachel Maddow show…

The 2016 Olympics went to Rio, Brazil……conservatives celebrate America's loss.

Consider the glee by America's new enemies…..

Beck: "Oh, it's so sweet" that Chicago's bid failed; "savor this moment."

Breitbart website: "It is kind of like the world community saying to President Obama, 'Not only no, but Hell No.' "

Limbaugh: For those "upset that I sound gleeful — I am. I don't deny it. I'm happy."

Drudge: "The ego has landed. World rejects Obama: Chicago out in first round."

RedState.com's Erickson: "World rejects Barack Obama. … Hahahahaha."

Soon after news broke that the International Olympic Committee had rejected Chicago's bid to host the 2016 Olympics, which President Obama had personally lobbied for, Weekly Standard blogger John McCormack published a celebratory post on the magazine's blog, titled "Chicago Loses! Chicago Loses!." McCormack wrote that "Cheers erupt at WEEKLY STANDARD world headquarters"

Malkin: "Goodbye, 'Yes We Can.' Hello, 'No, You Can't.' "

Honestly, I've never seen anything like this before. Cheering when America loses. Delighting in national defeat.

Take a moment to view the now-confirmed new enemies of America celebrating President Obama's failure to land the 2016 Olympic Games……share with me your feelings at what you see at the 1:20 mark…..

For those who would suggest that it's only the fake-news "entertainers", like the deranged Beck or the drug addict Rush who celebrated in America's loss……go read the Village's Jennifer Loven from the highly respected Associated Press.

Despite Obama's fabled charm and powers of persuasion, his in-person plea for Chicago to host the 2016 Summer Games fell flat. It was a hugely embarrassing defeat. And taxpayers shelled out probably $1 million or more for the president, his wife and others to fly to Copenhagen and back to woo members of the International Olympic Committee.
…..

The defeat could soon be a distant memory, and may never be more than a quixotic-blip trip. But if, for whatever reason, bigger losses start piling up in Obama's corner, his performance in this case could be regarded as emblematic.

That is Village-speak for Beck's, "Oh, it's so sweet."

To make matters worse, the Knee Padded Loven ( I've written about her before) goes on in this morning's article to tell readers that losing out on this very legitimate attempt by an American president lobbying for what surely would be a jobs and income producer for the United States of America during a very stingy recession, "recalls a strain of criticism that has been gaining ground on him."

What "strain of criticism"?

Un-f*cking-believably…."He's trying to do too much at once." " He doesn't have what it takes to close a deal." "He is a celebrity, for sure, but is that always a good thing?…some perceive Obama as arrogantly relying too much on his celebrity status and not enough on the nitty-gritty work of winning votes." "He's too casual with the use of his own time." "He's junior varsity-league, still learning on the job. Will Obama do as poorly predicting how health-care votes are leaning in Congress, and make similarly ill-fated strategic decisions?"

Truly…..this bizarre rendering by wingnuts and Villagers alike is a national WTF moment. We've entered brand new bizarro territory. A media so corrupt and rotted, so challenged by an intelligent and articulate president who doesn't spend most of his time on vacation choking on pretzels while watching footall, or pretending to clear brush in pathetically staged photo-op sessions for the rubes……is now, just like Limbaugh and Beck and the TeaBagging nuts…..celebrating American losses.

As Glenn Greenwald pointed out the other day…..in one f*cking day Obama made more progress with the troubling national leaders of Iran than George W. Bush made in 8 years of "axis-of-evil" threats. But no celebrations by KneePadding KnobPolishers over such monumental feats in U.S.-Iranian relations. Hardly a mention.

About a third of voting America, those who are ardent fans of Bill-o, Sean, Rush, Glenny and the rest of America's modern-day Our Gang Comedy Clowns, have now been born-again into full-fledged enemies of America. Outrageously, these new American enemies have blurred the lines between Obama failing and America failing….and are now rooting openly for both.

It didn't have to be this way.

Those who are now celebrating America's loss, America's defeat, used to screech about wearing lapel flag pins and placing one's hand over one's heart when singing the National Anthem. These same moronically stupid screechers used to raise oh-so-serious questions whether or not a black man with an odd name was "patriotic enough."

Now those same simple-minded, dumbasses are celebrating American defeat.

P.S. If you don't think the conservative rubes are being manipulated, take a look at how our nation's self-declared Enemy-in-Chief, Glenn Beck, produces all those crocodile tears….

My blog buddy King last week….

What our media hasn't bothered to tell you is that the early interrogation and Enhanced Interrogation Techniques (EIT's) used against terrorist monsters like al-Nashiri, Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, and Abu Zubaydah worked, just like former VP Dick Cheney said they did. Cheney was ridiculed endlessly for saying that, but the CIA IG report leaves no doubt.

Defenders of America's use of cruel and illegal torture tactics cling to the thread of their own devisings that "torture worked". Led by The Dick, many conservatives have desperately sought justifications for the obvious illegalities of torture. It could be that conservative watchers of "24" have been convinced by Kiefer that torture is good and just…or it could be that conservatives don't want to admit that their Super-Patriotic Heroes committed war crimes, because then, THEY, would be shown to be mistaken.

Whatever the motivation might be, these torture defenders are anxious, even frenzied at times, to find something, anything, to defend their indefensible gibberish……they'll grasp for virtually anything that even remotely, on first glance, can be construed to support their position.

That's what King from All Da King's Men does in the above block quote. Look at his words. Torture, or the name given to torture by the easily-queasied, "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques", according to King's reading of the recent CIA report on interrogations, "worked." Here's King in his own words….

The EIT's worked, whether we like them or not.

It's odd that King is so cock-sure that the CIA's interrogation report leaves "no doubt" that torture "worked" to save American lives. Why? Because even Fran Townsend, George W. Bush's Terrorism Advisor said of the CIA's report….."the report doesn't say that."

The truth in 32 seconds….

Transcript of Fran Townsend's comment…

It’s very difficult to draw a cause and effect, because it’s not clear when techniques were applied vs. when that information was received. It’s implicit. It seems, when you read the report, that we got the — the — the most critical information after techniques had been applied. But the report doesn’t say that.

How it is that King sees words in the CIA report leaving "no doubt" that torture "worked" to save U.S lives….when the Bushie insider Townsend doesn't……will have to be taken up with King.

I realize that many conservative supporters of torture could give a sh*t whether torture "worked" or whether the CIA report leaves "no doubt" about the wonder-working salvation power of acting like savages……it just doesn't matter, according to some conservatives. Their defense of institutionalized American savagery is simply….'if America is doing it, it is the right, just, necessary and proper thing to do, because America, of all world countries, is singularly exceptional.'

So, there's that.

However, in King's case, I'm beginning to think a reading and comprehension dysfunction is at work. I can't be 100% sure, you understand…but it kinda, sorta, looks that way…..

Now, don't forget…..King said of the CIA report that there is "no doubt" that torture "worked."

From King's Fox News link included in All Da King's Men's August 25th posting….

It is not possible to say definitively that the waterboard is the reason for Abu Zubaydah's increased production, or if another factor, such as the length of detention, was the catalyst. Since the use of the waterboard, however, Abu Zubaydah has appeared to be cooperative.

With respect to A-Nashiri, [redacted] reported two waterboard sessions in November 2002, after which the psychologist/interrogators determined that Al-Nashiri was compliant….Because of the litany of techniques used by different interrogators over a relatively short period of time, it is difficult to identify exactly why Al-Nashiri became more willing to provide information.

King has "no doubt" that the CIA report proves that torture "worked." The report from which King quoted, however, actually says, "…it's not possible to say definitively…", and, "….it is difficult to identify exactly…."

So…is it a reading and comprehension problem? Is it a wishful thinking problem? What is it that motivates some conservatives and libertarians to not be able to read and comprehend relatively clear language?

This CIA report reading and comprehension discussion can serve as a case study for the larger information wars that have blanketed America for a number of years.

It also helps in understanding how it was that America could so easily be talked into attacking Iraq, a non-threatening country that had done absolutely nothing to warrant being attacked and occupied by U.S forces for going on 7 years now.

It's all about deception……self-imposed because of comprehension in reading problems and wishful thinking, partisan blindness…..or gullibility. I'll leave it to others to determine which form of deception applies here.

Postscript: I just remembered another oddity. Ms. Condi Rice told the 9-11 Commission that Junior Leader didn't want to "swat at flies" in the months leading up to 9-11. Now we know why. The deviants of the Bush administration preferred catching anything that could be characterized as a "fly", and as many youthful deviants would prefer, torturing those flies by tearing wings and legs off one at a time. So there's that.

And there's also this….

Cheney thinks it was a sterling success when it came to national security and counter-terrorism. Perhaps there's something to this. After all, except for the catastrophic events of 9/11, and the anthrax attacks against Americans, and terrorist attacks against U.S. allies, and the terrorist attacks against U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, and Bush's inability to capture those responsible for 9/11, and waging an unnecessary war that inspired more terrorists, and the success terrorists had in exploiting Bush's international unpopularity, the Bush/Cheney record on counter-terrorism was awesome.

As the Obama administration continues to do everything it can to cover-up for Bush/Cheney-era crimes against the American people, we now learn that Eric Holder, Obama's Attorney General, has appointed Republican, John Durham, as a "special prosecutor" to investigate "alleged detainee mistreatment"….

Holder has named longtime prosecutor John H. Durham, who has parachuted into crisis situations for both political parties over three decades, to open an early review of nearly a dozen cases of alleged detainee mistreatment at the hands of CIA interrogators and contractors.

Durham has already been "investigating" the destruction of CIA interrogation videotapes…..

The tapes allegedly depicted brutal scenes of waterboarding involving high-value al-Qaeda suspects. That investigation is in its 19th month, though lawyers following the case have cast doubt on whether criminal charges will be filed.

The videotapes investigation, reluctantly begun under the Bush administration, is the key to understanding Holder's goals in appointing Durham to investigate detainee abuse. No indictment recommendations will ever be made in the already 19-month-old videotapes investigation, but that long investigation gives the perception that federal leaders are serious about the rule of law. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Consider…

The White House reiterated in a statement that Obama doesn't believe in prosecuting CIA personnel who used "enhanced" techniques "in good faith and within the scope of legal guidance" that was provided by Bush administration officials.

All a thinking person has to ask themselves is this: Does the executive branch have the power, the legal right under the Constitution, to order actions to be carried out which specifically violate American law and international treaties and conventions? And does the executive branch have the legal right under the Constitution to order new laws to be written by obedient lawyers, ala John Yoo, the architect of the "legalization" of American propagated torture?

Bush and Cheney have already given their answers…..now "looking forward, not backward" Obama is giving his. Neither have anything to do with fidelity to law or the Constitution…..but both answers have to do with perception of fidelity to law and the Constitution. Because as Karl Rove and the Townhall Buster Uppers have already proven…..perception is all that matters.

Holder, (if you can even fathom this), isn't setting up an "investigation" to determine if people ordered the open violation of existing law or treaties. He's setting up an "investigation" to determine if people exceeded the "new laws" written by John Yoo and Jay Bybee.

It would be similar to only investigating whether a getaway man in a bank robbery had exceeded the orders he was given by the architect of the bank robbery.

But that's where we're at in America today. And so, just as with Abu Ghraib, perhaps a low level, no-name, CIA employee or private contractor will be reprimanded after John Durham concludes his report in 4 or 5 years….perhaps not.

All that really matters is that Obama, like Bush before him, creates a perception of taking egregious violations of law seriously. He really doesn't.

Others working for Obama don't take violations of the law seriously, either. Consider Obama's CIA chief, Leon Panetta…..

In a message to CIA employees, agency director Leon Panetta declined to enter the debate over whether waterboarding and other "enhanced" questioning techniques were legal or crossed the line into torture. But he vowed to defend employees who were acting under the legal guidance they were given at the time and noted that any review must consider the pressures that agency personnel were facing.

"This much is clear," Panetta said: "The CIA obtained intelligence from high-value detainees when inside information on al-Qaeda was in short supply."

Panetta's defense of CIA personnel used to be called the Nazi defense. But no more. Now the Nazi defense……we were only obeying orders, and hey, we were under a lot of pressure….is the American defense. It is the defense of the lawless.

The only thing in "short supply" from 2001 onward was loyalty to American law and the Constitution. Perception of terror, fearmongering, was all that mattered during Bush/Cheney….and they were successful in selling their lawless coup through that perception of terror.

Now, Obama is creating the perceptions. The perception of getting to the bottom of numerous Bush White House-ordered crimes by appointing an investigator who will start his investigation with the understanding that the Bush White House had the perfect right to order crimes to be committed.

Over the past number of years, whenever I suggested that George W. Bush was actually an American terrorist leader, I was quickly reprimanded by those Serious and Grown-up Conservatives who immediately sought to describe the former president as "protecting us from Islamofascists."

Now, former Bush Homeland Security head, Tom Ridge, in a new book, follows in the footsteps of The Reverend, and tells his readers that, yes, George W. Bush terrorized the American people for political gain.

From the news release…

Former US homeland security chief Tom Ridge charges in a new book that top aides to then-president George W. Bush pressured him to raise the "terror alert" level to sway the November 2004 US election.

Then defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld and attorney general John Ashcroft pushed him to elevate the color-coded threat level, but Ridge refused, according to a summary from his publisher, Thomas Dunne Books.

……

He also says that Bush's homeland security adviser at the White House, Fran Townsend, called his department ahead of an August 1, 2004 speech to ask Ridge to include a reference to "defensive measures … away from home" — language that he read as being a reference to the Iraq war.

In those remarks, Ridge said he was raising the threat alert level for the financial services sector in New York City, northern New Jersey, and Washington DC, and went on to praise Bush's leadership against extremism.

……

He later publicly acknowledged that much of the information underpinning the new alert was three years old, stoking Bush critics' charges of political manipulation.

I wrote many times during the Bush-Cheney overthrow of the United States that Karl Rove's obsession with a permanent Republican majority led him and Bush to politicize everything emanating from the White House. Early critics of the Bush administration called the Bushies "Mayberry Machiavellis" for a reason. "Everything was political," is the answer.

When a high government leader seeks to frighten the population he is responsible to protect, and he does so for the purpose of gaining a political edge……that person is a terrorist. Osama Bin Laden's political philosophy and George W Bush's were the same. Bin Laden's philosophy states that if people are scared, terrorized by events, political leanings can be altered, changed.

George W. Bush thought the same as Bin Laden. The Bushies actively sought to terrorize the American voting population just prior to the 2004 election, without any credible evidence to justify the terrorizing, in order to alter the outcome of what looked to be a very tight presidential race with John Kerry.

None of this is new. I've known about Ridge raising the terror chart levels for political purposes for years. But as Glenn Greenwald blogs, whenever someone, you know, from the loony left, suggested that's what was going on…..well, we were just loony…..and not Serious, like corporate-whore media members.

And it wasn't just terror color charts. The Iraq crime was sold to America using terror. "Mushroom clouds", "chemical and biological weapons", "WMD", "no doubt that Saddam has reconstituted his weapons program"…..etc. Spying on Americans without benefit of warrants, torturing detainees, Gitmo, extrordinary kidnappings…..all of this was sold to us with terror. All of this, as we have witnessed with The Dick since Obama's inauguration, was meant to scare, to terrorize the American people for conservative political purposes.

It's not simply George W. Bush who is guilty of terrorizing the American people during his administration, though he definitely is guilty. The Republican Party has become the Party of Terror. Constantly seeking to frighten and terrorize Americans through the use of imminent danger fear. That's the purpose of the townhall bust-ups, the carrying of semi-automatic weapons, the shouts, the visible hatred…..it's to scare, to terrorize other Americans for a political objective, in this case, to defeat health care reform.

All of this is transparently obvious, just as it was transparently obvious when the Bushies were leading the nation around using terror tactics in order to complete their wet dream of attacking and occupying Iraq.

It's a good thing that a moderate Republican, like Tom Ridge, is setting the record straight.

UPDATE: Here's a prime example of what I'm getting at today, from Idaho.

Also this.

From the AP….

About a dozen people carrying guns, including one with a military-style rifle, milled among protesters outside the convention center where President Barack Obama was giving a speech Monday – the latest incident in which protesters have openly displayed firearms near the president.

These Timothy McVeigh wannabes are kind of like vampires. Vampires only come out after dark, you know, according to the movies and all…..and military-style rifle owners only come out in public when America has a Democratic president. It's the damnest thing.

The people wearing firearms at townhall gatherings, the radicals bearing semi-automatic assault weapons outside locations where President Obama is appearing, need to be rounded up and locked away. That's what Bush and Cheney would have done. Is there any doubt about that?

The criminal party, being as lawless as they are, believed that the only way to deal with political opponents was through authoritarian means. Bumper stickers and tee-shirts were where the Bushies drew the line on threats. And that was AFTER the Republican goon squads had filtered, screened and thugged-out any potential Democrat from their public appearances.

If anyone toting an assault weapon had even been rumored to be within miles of Mr. Bush, they would be in Guantanomo today. So, what's happening today over health care reform, for Christ's sake, has no equivalency when Republicans are in power.

What we are witnessing is a dangerous game of taunting Obama's presidency. These, you know, real bad asses, are daring Obama's Secret Service to confiscate their weapons or take them into custody for questioning. Double-dog daring them. Should the Secret Service do so….then ClusterFox and their f*cked-up Friends, "I need an oxycontin" Rush, and representatives of the radical and dangerous NRA will be seen plastered over every teevee show and newspaper article shrieking…."See? I told you they wanted to take away our guns."

That's the primary motivation for wingnuts bringing guns to Democratic presidential events. It's all a game of "gotcha-chicken" being played by members of the criminal political party oh-so-worked-up because Americans overhwlemingly voted their criminal asses out of office last November.

Secondarily comes the intimidation factor. If regular, law abiding, non-radical Americans had thought about attending a townhall where health care reform information from their representative would be shared…..they'll think twice about attending if there is a good chance there will be armed thugs present. Who would blame them for staying home?

That's how the folks who are cerebrally-challenged always act. Conservatives have no new ideas and their old ideas were last seen going down in flames during Bush/Cheney. Just as the last administration only knew bellicosity and knee-jerk warmongering in crisis situations that they either didn't fully understand or didn't care to understand,….so too the cerebrally-challenged semi-automatic carriers outside townhall meetings.

These potentially dangerous radicals have no answers to our national crisis in health care, just as the Republican Party has no solutions to offer. But they have guns. And if they bring guns to these events, at least they think they can prevent those who aren't cerebrally-challenged from coming up with solutions.

The NRA cultsters, the Tim McVeigh wannabes, the smart-ass "chicken-gotcha" players carrying assault weapons to democratic events….are the grown-up equivalents to that oversized bully in elementary school. You remember that kid. He was the one who was always bigger than the other kids in the class. Although he was dumber than a big box of rocks, he would, literally, throw his size around as a constant threat to anyone who didn't let him have his way.
Even though the big kid was held back, because his mental capabilites didn't match his supersized-self, he still was on the playground at recess acting all intimidating if anyone even looked at him the wrong way.

That's all that's left of the Party of Lincoln. A pitiful mess of box-of-rockers whose answer to all challenges they aren't equipped to understand….is intimidating thuggery.

It's only a matter of time before someone gets hurt…..and like with all authoritarian-minded numbskulls whose first response is always violence, they'll point the finger at the victim(s), and say it's all their fault for not giving them everything they wanted.

Please watch the first few minutes of this clip from last night's Rachel Maddow program……

There are those who would seek to convince me that the hatred, rage, violence. swastikas, death threats, hangings-in-effigy and brandishing of firearms recently in and around townhall meetings is simply a backlash to the Obama administration's attempt to extend health care services to most Americans.

Think about that for a moment.

All of this furor, the furor that whore-media is more than happy to plaster over all it's offerings, we're being told, has been created by a still-unfinished-proposal to help Americans obtain health care.

As I said yesterday, I do not accept that framing……it is, without doubt, dishonest.

Even though the wingnut chorus oftentimes sings in the key of incoherence, making it difficult to follow……the one "verse" most often repeated to justify all the whacked-out-winger craziness is government spending and the national debt.

Heres' why that excuse is not just flimsy, but isn't even worth the breath necessary to voice it:

It is a fact that under the leadership of George W. Bush the United States of America added more debt, borrowed more money, than all the other previous presidential administrations COMBINED.

When Bush took office, the national debt was $5.73 trillion. When he left, it was $10.7 trillion. That's a difference of $4.97 trillion,…Link

$5 trillion cash advanced during the Bush years……yet not one hate-filled demonstration or hysterical-rage protest with screamers and sign wavers warning of the end of the republic. Not one.

A doubling of the debt in 8 years while simultaneously handing out huge tax CUTS to America's wealthiest…..but, by god, not one protest, not one sign from conservatives calling Bush fiscally irresponsible.

Furthermore, all of Bush's borrowing didn't produce any positive results for Americans. Just the opposite. Employment, wage levels, buying power, pension values, all deteriorated. Deteriorated to the point where now we're in the worse recession of my 60 year lifetime.

Yet no conservative protests about any of it during the last 8 years. None.

Astonishingly, less than a year into a new, black, Democratic presidency, on the heels of an unfinished proposal to offer more and better health services to all Americans…..a plan that will be revenue neutral and not add to the national debt, at all…..and oh-so-fiscally-concerned conservatives are throwing a massive, hysterical sh*t fit.

It's all just so dishonest.

Now let me say something in regard to the Maddow clip and where I think we're headed…..

I think what we're witnessing is an extension of the Bush-Cheney years. What was consistent over the past eight years was the lawlessness and unaccountability of the Bushies. Conservatives will balk….but history wll bear that truth out. No other administration in American history has run up so much debt or been so lawless in their approach to governing.

And now that the Republicans are a tiny minority, the lawless tactics have filtered down to the same wingers who remained silent during the reckless debt accumulation years of George and Dick. That's why we're seeing the unruly mobs at Democratic representatives' townhalls…..not Republican townhalls. That's why we're seeing the guns, the swastikas, the nooses, the death threats. The wingers, following in the footsteps of their lawless and unaccountable heroes, are going to take the law into their own hands.

Tuesday in New Hampshire, outside of an Obama town hall meeting, a man stood with a loaded gun strapped on to his leg. Later, Chris Matthews interviewed him on MSNBC. The man said that his strapping on of that gun had nothing to do with health care reform…..he was just exercising his freedoms.

What he was really doing was setting the stage for Americans to become comfortable, accepting of, gun brandishing, thuggery, and violence as a response to the newly elected black Democratic president and his policy proposals. It's the same dynamic seen with the lawless wingers who are currently lifting up Dr. George Tiller's assassin, Scott Roeder, as a patriot, a role model.

I don't give a good goddamn what the New Hampshire laws are…..this man had no right….none….to carry a loaded gun anywhere in the proximity of the President of the United States. During the Bush years, middle aged women were arrested at gatherings for having a bumpersticker on their cars…..yet we're being prepped now to accept the idea of loaded guns at presidential townhalls?

It's insane.

The lawless mob-minded wingers will continue this month to bust-up Democratic townhall meetings. They will brandish more guns, hold up even more hateful signs and they will shout down or threaten any who challenge them. All of that will lead up to the corporate organized and sponsored 9/12 Tea Party gathering in Washington D.C……which is sure to be a spectacle of mass hysteria and hate.

Most likely, with all this "unrest", lawmakers will fold on health care reform, as many are doing right now…..and that will prove that lawlessness, thuggery, death threats, the brandishing of guns, and hate speech WORKS.

And, not uncoincidentally, that's exactly what the Bush and Cheney regime proved.