No
I am having a hard time with the liberal mind. They state a story is not accurate, but give no reason why it is not accurate
It is like Time
every-one knows Time and the NY times, Washington Post do not lean left, they are the leading the cause for the left
everyone knows that
but the story no matter how spun out it is usually is true
The Liberal mind gives the impression that this story is what?
wrong?
why?
It's not up to us to prove an unconfirmed, unproven story false.
I am unsure what this would be called
Phone call by Kuwaiti courier led to bin Laden - Yahoo! News
Then in 2004, top al-Qaida operative Hassan Ghul was captured in Iraq. Ghul told the CIA that al-Kuwaiti was a courier, someone crucial to the terrorist organization. In particular, Ghul said, the courier was close to Faraj al-Libi, who replaced Mohammed as al-Qaida's operational commander. It was a key break in the hunt for in bin Laden's personal courier.
"Hassan Ghul was the linchpin," a U.S. official said.
Finally, in May 2005, al-Libi was captured. Under CIA interrogation, al-Libi admitted that when he was promoted to succeed Mohammed, he received the word through a courier. But he made up a name for the courier and denied knowing al-Kuwaiti, a denial that was so adamant and unbelievable that the CIA took it as confirmation that he and Mohammed were protecting the courier. It only reinforced the idea that al-Kuwaiti was very important to al-Qaida.
If they could find the man known as al-Kuwaiti, they'd find bin Laden.
The revelation that intelligence gleaned from the CIA's so-called black sites helped kill bin Laden was seen as vindication for many intelligence officials who have been repeatedly investigated and criticized for their involvement in a program that involved the harshest interrogation methods in U.S. history.