Let's Play a Game!

[TooTall]

U.S. Boosts Security At Facilities Ahead Of Torture Report's Release

The U.S. has increased security of its facilities around the world ahead of the release Tuesday by the Senate of the executive summary of its report on the CIA's interrogation practices in the war on terrorism, White House spokesman Josh Earnest said today.

"The administration has for months been preparing for the release of this report. There are some indications that the release of this report could lead to a greater risk that is posed to U.S. facilities and individuals all around the world," Earnest said. "So the administration has taken the prudent step to ensure that the proper security precautions are in place at U.S. facilities around the globe."

He said the Senate Intelligence Committee had informed the White House that the executive summary will be released on Tuesday, adding that the White House supported the move.

"The president believes that on principle it's important to release that report so that people around the world, and people here at home, understand what exactly what transpired," he said.

The Senate Intelligence Committee voted in April to release the 480-page executive summary of the report on the CIA's interrogation policies during the presidency of George W. Bush

It's worth noting here that many people are calling the document the Senate's report. It is, in fact, the executive summary of the full 6,200-page report.

Criticism began even before its details were made public.

Secretary of State John Kerry called Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif, chair of the Senate intelligence panel, last week on behalf of the White House, asking for a delay. NPR's Lauren Hodges reported there were fears in Congress the report would put "American personnel in danger overseas and incite further violence from extremists."

But lawmakers such as Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., said it was essential the executive summary was released.

"This report would never happen in North Korea or China or Russia," she told CBS on Monday. "But in the United States, we hold our government accountable. And, I think, that process is so important, so fundamental to our democracy, that it's essential that this report comes out."

Bush, speaking on CNN over the weekend, said he hadn't read the report, but called those in the CIA "patriots."

"And whatever the report says, if it diminishes their contributions to our country, it is way off base," he said. "And I knew the directors, I knew the deputy directors, you know, I knew a lot of the operators. These are good people, really good people and we're lucky as a nation to have them."

The New York Times reported that the former president's team "has decided to link arms with former intelligence officials and challenge its conclusions."

U.S. Boosts Security At Facilities Ahead Of Torture Report s Release The Two-Way NPR




It must be pretty bad if they're having to tighten security.

You failed.
The report is about US interrogation techniques.
The headline writer characterized it as "torture", which is a value judgement.
/fail.

If you're referring to waterboarding, it is torture. You need to brush up on some history. In 1947, the US charged a Japanese officer with war crimes just for waterboarding a US civilian. He did 15 years of hard labor in prison.

Since the US military waterboards some soldiers to prepare them for what might happen to them if captured, shouldn't they be arrested and imprisoned?

I bet they don't waterboard them 183 times.

In a further embarrassment for Mr Bush yesterday, Malcolm Nance, an advisor on terrorism to the US departments of Homeland Security, Special Operations and Intelligence, publicly denounced the practice. He revealed that waterboarding is used in training at the US Navy's Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape School in San Diego, and claimed to have witnessed and supervised "hundreds" of waterboarding exercises. Although these last only a few minutes and take place under medical supervision, he concluded that "waterboarding is a torture technique – period".

Waterboarding is torture - I did it myself says US advisor - Americas - World - The Independent

If waterboarding a soldier one time is not a crime, how many times must they do it for it to be called a crime? According to the CIA, there was medical supervision present when they waterboarded a prisoner. I am not interested in a biased opinion expressed by a political advisor.

 

[Vandalshandle]

Republicans are denying the validity of the congressional report already. They simply are not going to be happy until they turn the USA into the kind of society that this country has always stood up against.

 

[Carla_Danger]

U.S. Boosts Security At Facilities Ahead Of Torture Report's Release

The U.S. has increased security of its facilities around the world ahead of the release Tuesday by the Senate of the executive summary of its report on the CIA's interrogation practices in the war on terrorism, White House spokesman Josh Earnest said today.

"The administration has for months been preparing for the release of this report. There are some indications that the release of this report could lead to a greater risk that is posed to U.S. facilities and individuals all around the world," Earnest said. "So the administration has taken the prudent step to ensure that the proper security precautions are in place at U.S. facilities around the globe."

He said the Senate Intelligence Committee had informed the White House that the executive summary will be released on Tuesday, adding that the White House supported the move.

"The president believes that on principle it's important to release that report so that people around the world, and people here at home, understand what exactly what transpired," he said.

The Senate Intelligence Committee voted in April to release the 480-page executive summary of the report on the CIA's interrogation policies during the presidency of George W. Bush

It's worth noting here that many people are calling the document the Senate's report. It is, in fact, the executive summary of the full 6,200-page report.

Criticism began even before its details were made public.

Secretary of State John Kerry called Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif, chair of the Senate intelligence panel, last week on behalf of the White House, asking for a delay. NPR's Lauren Hodges reported there were fears in Congress the report would put "American personnel in danger overseas and incite further violence from extremists."

But lawmakers such as Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., said it was essential the executive summary was released.

"This report would never happen in North Korea or China or Russia," she told CBS on Monday. "But in the United States, we hold our government accountable. And, I think, that process is so important, so fundamental to our democracy, that it's essential that this report comes out."

Bush, speaking on CNN over the weekend, said he hadn't read the report, but called those in the CIA "patriots."

"And whatever the report says, if it diminishes their contributions to our country, it is way off base," he said. "And I knew the directors, I knew the deputy directors, you know, I knew a lot of the operators. These are good people, really good people and we're lucky as a nation to have them."

The New York Times reported that the former president's team "has decided to link arms with former intelligence officials and challenge its conclusions."

U.S. Boosts Security At Facilities Ahead Of Torture Report s Release The Two-Way NPR




It must be pretty bad if they're having to tighten security.

You failed.
The report is about US interrogation techniques.
The headline writer characterized it as "torture", which is a value judgement.
/fail.

If you're referring to waterboarding, it is torture. You need to brush up on some history. In 1947, the US charged a Japanese officer with war crimes just for waterboarding a US civilian. He did 15 years of hard labor in prison.

Since the US military waterboards some soldiers to prepare them for what might happen to them if captured, shouldn't they be arrested and imprisoned?

I bet they don't waterboard them 183 times.

In a further embarrassment for Mr Bush yesterday, Malcolm Nance, an advisor on terrorism to the US departments of Homeland Security, Special Operations and Intelligence, publicly denounced the practice. He revealed that waterboarding is used in training at the US Navy's Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape School in San Diego, and claimed to have witnessed and supervised "hundreds" of waterboarding exercises. Although these last only a few minutes and take place under medical supervision, he concluded that "waterboarding is a torture technique – period".

Waterboarding is torture - I did it myself says US advisor - Americas - World - The Independent

If waterboarding a soldier one time is not a crime, how many times must they do it for it to be called a crime? According to the CIA, there was medical supervision present when they waterboarded a prisoner. I am not interested in a biased opinion expressed by a political advisor.

One time is torture. We used to charge Japanese soldiers with war crimes for waterboarding our soldiers. Is it only a crime when its done to us? When did we become the good torture people?

 

[Carla_Danger]

Republicans are denying the validity of the congressional report already. They simply are not going to be happy until they turn the USA into the kind of society that this country has always stood up against.

Of course they are.

 

[Mertex]

U.S. Boosts Security At Facilities Ahead Of Torture Report's Release

The U.S. has increased security of its facilities around the world ahead of the release Tuesday by the Senate of the executive summary of its report on the CIA's interrogation practices in the war on terrorism, White House spokesman Josh Earnest said today.

"The administration has for months been preparing for the release of this report. There are some indications that the release of this report could lead to a greater risk that is posed to U.S. facilities and individuals all around the world," Earnest said. "So the administration has taken the prudent step to ensure that the proper security precautions are in place at U.S. facilities around the globe."

He said the Senate Intelligence Committee had informed the White House that the executive summary will be released on Tuesday, adding that the White House supported the move.

"The president believes that on principle it's important to release that report so that people around the world, and people here at home, understand what exactly what transpired," he said.

The Senate Intelligence Committee voted in April to release the 480-page executive summary of the report on the CIA's interrogation policies during the presidency of George W. Bush

It's worth noting here that many people are calling the document the Senate's report. It is, in fact, the executive summary of the full 6,200-page report.

Criticism began even before its details were made public.

Secretary of State John Kerry called Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif, chair of the Senate intelligence panel, last week on behalf of the White House, asking for a delay. NPR's Lauren Hodges reported there were fears in Congress the report would put "American personnel in danger overseas and incite further violence from extremists."

But lawmakers such as Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., said it was essential the executive summary was released.

"This report would never happen in North Korea or China or Russia," she told CBS on Monday. "But in the United States, we hold our government accountable. And, I think, that process is so important, so fundamental to our democracy, that it's essential that this report comes out."

Bush, speaking on CNN over the weekend, said he hadn't read the report, but called those in the CIA "patriots."

"And whatever the report says, if it diminishes their contributions to our country, it is way off base," he said. "And I knew the directors, I knew the deputy directors, you know, I knew a lot of the operators. These are good people, really good people and we're lucky as a nation to have them."

The New York Times reported that the former president's team "has decided to link arms with former intelligence officials and challenge its conclusions."

U.S. Boosts Security At Facilities Ahead Of Torture Report s Release The Two-Way NPR




It must be pretty bad if they're having to tighten security.

You failed.
The report is about US interrogation techniques.
The headline writer characterized it as "torture", which is a value judgement.
/fail.

If you're referring to waterboarding, it is torture. You need to brush up on some history. In 1947, the US charged a Japanese officer with war crimes just for waterboarding a US civilian. He did 15 years of hard labor in prison.

Since the US military waterboards some soldiers to prepare them for what might happen to them if captured, shouldn't they be arrested and imprisoned?

Are you using the same excuse that Bush/Cheney used? Big difference between the training and what Bush/Cheney and most Republicans consider "not torture".


One of the psychologists/interrogators acknowledged that the Agency’s use of the technique differed from that used in SERE training and explained that the Agency’s technique is different because it is 'for real' and is more poignant and convincing."

The report also says the CIA's Office of Medical Services has characterized the SERE waterboarding as "so different from the subsequent Agency usage as to make it almost irrelevant." The office said its frequency and intensity raised questions about whether it was effective or medically safe.

So we think Hunter misleads a bit by equating waterboarding in training of military personnel with the technique used on terror suspects. According to the CIA inspector general's report, the technique used on the suspects was more powerful and convincing. And in the case of one terror suspect, it was used 183 times, often in rapid succession. So to argue the technique isn't torture because it is used on American servicemen as part of training ignores that it was not used in the same way.
Duncan Hunter says we have waterboarded our own military as part of training exercises PolitiFact

 

[Derideo_Te]

U.S. Boosts Security At Facilities Ahead Of Torture Report's Release

The U.S. has increased security of its facilities around the world ahead of the release Tuesday by the Senate of the executive summary of its report on the CIA's interrogation practices in the war on terrorism, White House spokesman Josh Earnest said today.

"The administration has for months been preparing for the release of this report. There are some indications that the release of this report could lead to a greater risk that is posed to U.S. facilities and individuals all around the world," Earnest said. "So the administration has taken the prudent step to ensure that the proper security precautions are in place at U.S. facilities around the globe."

He said the Senate Intelligence Committee had informed the White House that the executive summary will be released on Tuesday, adding that the White House supported the move.

"The president believes that on principle it's important to release that report so that people around the world, and people here at home, understand what exactly what transpired," he said.

The Senate Intelligence Committee voted in April to release the 480-page executive summary of the report on the CIA's interrogation policies during the presidency of George W. Bush

It's worth noting here that many people are calling the document the Senate's report. It is, in fact, the executive summary of the full 6,200-page report.

Criticism began even before its details were made public.

Secretary of State John Kerry called Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif, chair of the Senate intelligence panel, last week on behalf of the White House, asking for a delay. NPR's Lauren Hodges reported there were fears in Congress the report would put "American personnel in danger overseas and incite further violence from extremists."

But lawmakers such as Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., said it was essential the executive summary was released.

"This report would never happen in North Korea or China or Russia," she told CBS on Monday. "But in the United States, we hold our government accountable. And, I think, that process is so important, so fundamental to our democracy, that it's essential that this report comes out."

Bush, speaking on CNN over the weekend, said he hadn't read the report, but called those in the CIA "patriots."

"And whatever the report says, if it diminishes their contributions to our country, it is way off base," he said. "And I knew the directors, I knew the deputy directors, you know, I knew a lot of the operators. These are good people, really good people and we're lucky as a nation to have them."

The New York Times reported that the former president's team "has decided to link arms with former intelligence officials and challenge its conclusions."

U.S. Boosts Security At Facilities Ahead Of Torture Report s Release The Two-Way NPR




It must be pretty bad if they're having to tighten security.

My opinion, those who will cut off the heads of innocent journalists could give a shit about torture. I am guessing they laugh their asses off over the concern we show for what they do everyday. Treating us like the villains and them as some sort of victim is just pure made up BS. There won't be riots over this and if there are they are purely staged.

What I think they might care more about is our use of drones and the killing of their families and friends.

The point may be something different completely.

I don't know of too many folks that are unaware of the fact we used advanced interrogation techniques (we tortured captives using all kinds of methods). The bias is can be evident in that Democrats feel the need to release the report right after they get their asses handed to them in the mid-terms.

The report doesn't have to biased for the presentation to serve a biased purpose.

.

The report was ready months before the election. It was only delayed because the CIA wanted parts of it redacted. Blame the CIA for the timing of the release of the report.

 

[BlackSand]

The report was ready months before the election. It was only delayed because the CIA wanted parts of it redacted. Blame the CIA for the timing of the release of the report.

It was approved and voted on in 2012 ... Try again!

"Both Republicans and former CIA officials will challenge the report's accuracy. Just one Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee, Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, joined Democrats in voting to approve it in 2012. The ranking Republican on the committee, Georgia Sen. Saxby Chambliss, said when the report was approved in 2012 that, "a number of significant errors, omissions, assumptions, and ambiguities--as well as a lot of cherry-picking--were found that call the conclusions into question," partially because it was written without conducting interviews with people involved."



.

 

[jillian]

You're entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.

Ironic coming from you. Ye who posts from the NPR.

little boy, perhaps the problem is you don't know what being well-informed is.

A poll by Farleigh Dickinson University in New Jersey showed that of all the news channels out there, Fox News viewers are the least informed.

People were asked questions about news habits and current events in a statewide poll of 600 New Jersey residents recently. Results showed that viewers of Sunday morning news shows were the most informed about current events, while Fox News viewers were the least informed. In fact, FDU poll results showed they were even less informed than those who say they don’t watch any news at all.

Readers of The New York Times, USA Today and listeners to National Public Radio were better informed about international events than other media outlet

Fox News Viewers Uninformed NPR Listeners Not Poll Suggests - Forbes

now let's pretend that forbes is "liberal".

 

[Carla_Danger]

You're entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.

Ironic coming from you. Ye who posts from the NPR.

little boy, perhaps the problem is you don't know what being well-informed is.

A poll by Farleigh Dickinson University in New Jersey showed that of all the news channels out there, Fox News viewers are the least informed.

People were asked questions about news habits and current events in a statewide poll of 600 New Jersey residents recently. Results showed that viewers of Sunday morning news shows were the most informed about current events, while Fox News viewers were the least informed. In fact, FDU poll results showed they were even less informed than those who say they don’t watch any news at all.

Readers of The New York Times, USA Today and listeners to National Public Radio were better informed about international events than other media outlet

Fox News Viewers Uninformed NPR Listeners Not Poll Suggests - Forbes

now let's pretend that forbes is "liberal".

Your link states that people who only watch Fox news are less informed than people who watch no news at all.

 

[jillian]

You're entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.

Ironic coming from you. Ye who posts from the NPR.

little boy, perhaps the problem is you don't know what being well-informed is.

A poll by Farleigh Dickinson University in New Jersey showed that of all the news channels out there, Fox News viewers are the least informed.

People were asked questions about news habits and current events in a statewide poll of 600 New Jersey residents recently. Results showed that viewers of Sunday morning news shows were the most informed about current events, while Fox News viewers were the least informed. In fact, FDU poll results showed they were even less informed than those who say they don’t watch any news at all.

Readers of The New York Times, USA Today and listeners to National Public Radio were better informed about international events than other media outlet

Fox News Viewers Uninformed NPR Listeners Not Poll Suggests - Forbes

now let's pretend that forbes is "liberal".

Your link states that people who only watch Fox news are less informed than people who watch no news at all.

yep.

 

[TemplarKormac]

You're entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.

Ironic coming from you. Ye who posts from the NPR.

little boy, perhaps the problem is you don't know what being well-informed is.

A poll by Farleigh Dickinson University in New Jersey showed that of all the news channels out there, Fox News viewers are the least informed.

People were asked questions about news habits and current events in a statewide poll of 600 New Jersey residents recently. Results showed that viewers of Sunday morning news shows were the most informed about current events, while Fox News viewers were the least informed. In fact, FDU poll results showed they were even less informed than those who say they don’t watch any news at all.

Readers of The New York Times, USA Today and listeners to National Public Radio were better informed about international events than other media outlet

Fox News Viewers Uninformed NPR Listeners Not Poll Suggests - Forbes

now let's pretend that forbes is "liberal".

Your link states that people who only watch Fox news are less informed than people who watch no news at all.

You know, only people like you would measure the intelligence of a person based off of what news channel they watch. How preposterous.

 

[Derideo_Te]

The report was ready months before the election. It was only delayed because the CIA wanted parts of it redacted. Blame the CIA for the timing of the release of the report.

It was approved and voted on in 2012 ... Try again!

"Both Republicans and former CIA officials will challenge the report's accuracy. Just one Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee, Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, joined Democrats in voting to approve it in 2012. The ranking Republican on the committee, Georgia Sen. Saxby Chambliss, said when the report was approved in 2012 that, "a number of significant errors, omissions, assumptions, and ambiguities--as well as a lot of cherry-picking--were found that call the conclusions into question," partially because it was written without conducting interviews with people involved."



.

 

[Derideo_Te]

You're entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.

Ironic coming from you. Ye who posts from the NPR.

little boy, perhaps the problem is you don't know what being well-informed is.

A poll by Farleigh Dickinson University in New Jersey showed that of all the news channels out there, Fox News viewers are the least informed.

People were asked questions about news habits and current events in a statewide poll of 600 New Jersey residents recently. Results showed that viewers of Sunday morning news shows were the most informed about current events, while Fox News viewers were the least informed. In fact, FDU poll results showed they were even less informed than those who say they don’t watch any news at all.

Readers of The New York Times, USA Today and listeners to National Public Radio were better informed about international events than other media outlet

Fox News Viewers Uninformed NPR Listeners Not Poll Suggests - Forbes

now let's pretend that forbes is "liberal".

Your link states that people who only watch Fox news are less informed than people who watch no news at all.

You know, only people like you would measure the intelligence of a person based off of what news channel they watch. How preposterous.

What is preposterous is that you believed that they were "measuring intelligence". They were measuring knowledge of current events. Had you actually read the article you would have discovered that they panned MSNBC too and concluded that those who rely upon partisan sources were the least informed irrespective of left or right.

 

[TooTall]

You're entitled to your own opinions, but not your own facts.

Ironic coming from you. Ye who posts from the NPR.

little boy, perhaps the problem is you don't know what being well-informed is.

A poll by Farleigh Dickinson University in New Jersey showed that of all the news channels out there, Fox News viewers are the least informed.

People were asked questions about news habits and current events in a statewide poll of 600 New Jersey residents recently. Results showed that viewers of Sunday morning news shows were the most informed about current events, while Fox News viewers were the least informed. In fact, FDU poll results showed they were even less informed than those who say they don’t watch any news at all.

Readers of The New York Times, USA Today and listeners to National Public Radio were better informed about international events than other media outlet

Fox News Viewers Uninformed NPR Listeners Not Poll Suggests - Forbes

now let's pretend that forbes is "liberal".

Your link states that people who only watch Fox news are less informed than people who watch no news at all.

Here is the quote.

"In fact, FDU poll results showed they were even less informed than those who say they don’t watch any news at all." Maybe some of the folks lied.

 

[bripat9643]

Does anyone remember what "real news" looks like? I'm talking about real news articles that leave out bias and opinion. News is what happened. Bias is the spin put on it by bloggers who want to tell you what to think about what happened, tell you what emotion you should experience according to their perception, not your own.

In an effort to be even clearer, an actual NEWS story is one that contains no characterizations of people or incidents.

The challenge in this game is to post a "real" news article, covering politics only, with no bias, spin, or characterizations. Pick any topic you like.

Examples:

A right-wing biased report is "Yesterday just as innocent children were getting off their school bus, a Democrat exposed himself to the whole busload by setting himself on fire, thus burning all his clothes off right in front of them. I think this is just the logical conclusion of Liberal/Progressive values. Watch out -- the Liberals may set YOU on fire next!!"

A left-wing biased report says "In an apparent hate crime, a victim of the crassly wealthy bankers of Wall Street who illegally foreclosed on his home was burned at the stake in a public park yesterday by armed Tea Party thugs, bused in by The Koch Brothers and Rupert Murdoch. We will be covering tonight's candlelight vigil for the murdered man at 8 pm."

The "real" news story goes like this....A news reporter says "At 3 pm yesterday afternoon, a man in Times Square burst into flames in what is being called "spontaneous human combustion" by police. More information to come as the incident is investigated."

This should be fun! I'll go first!

I don't recall ever seeing a "real news" story. The news has always been mostly propaganda.

 

[bripat9643]

Real news without bias and opinion ... Was that back when a runner came up from the docks and proclaimed a boat had arrived?

.

You are young. I remember when there was plenty of news that was just reporting what happened, not telling us what to think about it, not using connotative language, not propaganda, etc. Your idea that real news is relagated to a long ago, distant past is a misconception based on your ignorance of history and your thinking what we see in news reporting today is what the reality has always been.

I don't like being told how to think and feel about news stories.

Anyone who thinks Walter Cronkite was unbiased is congenitally naive. Cronkite is the guy who singlehandedly lost the Vietnam War for the United States by characterizing the Tet offensive as a great North Vietnamese victory

 

[Carla_Danger]

Real news without bias and opinion ... Was that back when a runner came up from the docks and proclaimed a boat had arrived?

.

You are young. I remember when there was plenty of news that was just reporting what happened, not telling us what to think about it, not using connotative language, not propaganda, etc. Your idea that real news is relagated to a long ago, distant past is a misconception based on your ignorance of history and your thinking what we see in news reporting today is what the reality has always been.

I don't like being told how to think and feel about news stories.

Anyone who thinks Walter Cronkite was unbiased is congenitally naive. Cronkite is the guy who singlehandedly lost the Vietnam War for the United States by characterizing the Tet offensive as a great North Vietnamese victory

You're suffering from misplaced blame syndrome. Are you still mad at Jane Fonda?

 

[Vandalshandle]

Speaking of under informed, as everyone here can see, there are still people who think that Walter Cronkite lost the Vietnam war.

You can't make stuff like this up!

 

[bripat9643]

Real news without bias and opinion ... Was that back when a runner came up from the docks and proclaimed a boat had arrived?

.

You are young. I remember when there was plenty of news that was just reporting what happened, not telling us what to think about it, not using connotative language, not propaganda, etc. Your idea that real news is relagated to a long ago, distant past is a misconception based on your ignorance of history and your thinking what we see in news reporting today is what the reality has always been.

I don't like being told how to think and feel about news stories.

Anyone who thinks Walter Cronkite was unbiased is congenitally naive. Cronkite is the guy who singlehandedly lost the Vietnam War for the United States by characterizing the Tet offensive as a great North Vietnamese victory

You're suffering from misplaced blame syndrome. Are you still mad at Jane Fonda?

Your attempt to divert the discussion is duly noted. The bottom line: Cronkite was not an unbiased reporter. He was a liberal who used his influence to advance his agenda.

 

[BlackSand]

The report was ready months before the election. It was only delayed because the CIA wanted parts of it redacted. Blame the CIA for the timing of the release of the report.

It was approved and voted on in 2012 ... Try again!

"Both Republicans and former CIA officials will challenge the report's accuracy. Just one Republican on the Senate Intelligence Committee, Sen. Olympia Snowe, R-Maine, joined Democrats in voting to approve it in 2012. The ranking Republican on the committee, Georgia Sen. Saxby Chambliss, said when the report was approved in 2012 that, "a number of significant errors, omissions, assumptions, and ambiguities--as well as a lot of cherry-picking--were found that call the conclusions into question," partially because it was written without conducting interviews with people involved."



.

Redaction was completed in April of this year ... I already quoted a link as to when it was approved by Congress. The Administration decided to release it this week because if they didn't it would never have been released. The only reason they released it now is because Democrats still control that committee ... And won't after this week.

If you care to disagree ... You provide a link ... You chose to respond to the comment I posed earlier which had nothing to do with a link ... Do your own leg-work.

.