It has now come to light that the detainee abuse in Guantanamo Bay, Iraq and Afghanistan started when the Bush administration ordered our interrogators to use a document called: "Communist Coercive Methods for Eliciting Individual Compliance."

This was a 1957 document that showed how the Chinese Communists tortured people -- in order to get false confessions! The only thing we changed was that we dropped the title of the document. Otherwise it is exactly the same. We have been using communist torture tactics that are designed to get false confessions. Meanwhile, The Bush administration has been calling it "enhanced interrogations" and saying we got "valuable intelligence" from it.

More details on the story here:




If you want to read the story of how we came to use this document for our own interrogations, you can click here. This is deplorable. Will anyone ever suffer the consequences for ordering this illegal torture? Will the press question John McCain on why he voted to allow the CIA to continue doing this? I wouldn't bank on it.

But if we do this, and no one ever gets punished for it, can we really say that America doesn't torture anymore?

Watch the Best Web TV Show Here and Here

While the Senate was ready to vote on the FISA Amendments Act today, Senators Russell Feingold and Christopher Dodd fought to keep them from casting a final vote and jamming the bill through Congress.

In a statement released by Feingold, he says:

"I am pleased we were able to delay the vote on FISA until after the July 4th holiday instead of having it jammed through. I hope that over the July 4th Holiday, Senators will take a closer look at the deeply flawed legislation and understand how it threatens the civil liberties of the American People. It is possibly to protect this country against the terrorists while also protecting the rights and freedoms that define our nation."

For those who haven't read up on the new FISA bill, it would basically give the government the right to peek into the private overseas phone conversations, emails, and even text messages of all Americans. Part of the bill would give retroactive immunity to telephone companies that gave the government private information of Americans.

Feingold says the FISA bill would also allow the government to take all international communications and put it in a giant database. The most outrageous part of the bill states that there does not have to be any court review or evidence that anyone is doing anything wrong before the government intrudes on the person's privacy. The government will simply have complete access to the personal overseas communications of every single American.

Feingold continues to say, "It's a vast power that has no limits. There's no regulation of it."

Obviously, the new FISA bill was created to help the government "track down terrorists"....just like the Iraq War was orchestrated to find weapons of mass destruction. It all makes perfect sense.

It's angering that the government has instilled so much fear in the minds of Americans, that many are ready to hand over precious civil liberties in the name of "protection." In fact, it's sickening. All the Republicans who are avid gun owners and want to protect their constitutional right to bear arms have NO RIGHT to say an American's right to privacy is not as important. This proposed FISA bill simply violates the right to privacy. Fear tactics should not trick Americans into giving up their freedoms. The Senate needs to wake up.

The more the Bush Administration remains in power, the more the United States mirrors the image George Orwell illustrated in his book 1984. Big brother really is watching, and members of our own Senate are allowing it to happen.

Feingold admits that many of the Senators have not completely read the bill and do not know the logistics of it. By holding off on the bill until after July 4th, hopefully the Senate will have the opportunity to think things over and not just hand the Bush Administration exactly what they want.

If you want to watch TYT's interview with Senator Feingold, please check out the video below:




More Young Turks on You Tube

Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama claimed over and over during the primaries that they were strong leaders who could take America in a new direction. They also claimed that George W. Bush was the worst president in US history. Then, how come they have never been able to beat him in almost any legislative battles?

This week they surrendered again. This time it was about giving immunity to telecommunication companies who broke the law to placate the Bush administration. Nearly everyone involved admits they broke the law -- otherwise they wouldn't need immunity.

I didn't rob a bank, so I don't need immunity for robbery. Everyone should have their rights, and that definitely applies to the telecom companies and the Bush administration as well, so it should be very simple for them to go into a courthouse and show there was nothing wrong with what they did. Except they can't, and that's why desperately need immunity for the crimes they have committed.

This isn't about spying on terrorists. The FISA court gives out warrants like they're growing on trees. If they spied on terrorists, it's the easiest thing in the world to show. No, this is for breaking the law and spying on Americans without a court order. Do we know who they spied on? No, and now we never will. Why? The Democrats are going to give these companies -- and by extension the Bush administration -- immunity for breaking the law.

In essence, the Democrats are giving a preemptive pardon to George Bush and everyone else that authorized and participated in this illegal surveillance program.

Now, if we only had a couple of strong leaders on the Democratic side who could stop this. Oh wait a minute, I remember two people that kept telling me how strong and capable they were. One of them even claimed that change was coming. You know when it might be a good time for change? Right about now.

Instead, Hillary Clinton is on vacation somewhere doing absolutely nothing about this immunity bill. When it's not about her career, all of a sudden she's not that moved to fight for us, our laws and our constitution. Since she's not going to be president, she's taken her ball and gone home.

And what about Obama? Nothing. Worse than nothing, because he's actually thinking about voting with the Republicans on a so-called compromise, which in the words of Sen. Feingold is nothing short of a "capitulation." Leadership you can believe in!

You think I sound angry here, you should have seen me all week on the show. If you want to see what I think of pathetic Democratic weakness, watch this (not safe for work or with kids around). The Democrats make it nearly impossible to respect them. And if you want to see what I think of Senator Clinton and Senator Obama's awful record of leadership on this issue, watch this:




If you can't beat the most unpopular president of all time in a simple legislative fight like this, how can you claim to be a strong and effective leader?

Young Turks on You Tube

This man has no conscience. He didn't care to get Osama bin Laden for seven long years and now the Times Online in the UK is reporting Bush is putting on the pressure to get Osama before he leaves office. He wants it for his legacy. It was never about those people who died on September 11th. This has always been about George Bush's terrible and despicable ego. It's easy to see why the country is repulsed by this man:




Here are the quotes where Bush said he didn't care about getting Osama bin Laden. He wasn't concerned about him. How did the country and the press let him get away with that? Imagine if a Democrat had said that?

The press claims they're better now after the lessons they learned from how they covered the lead-up to the Iraq War. In fact, they've learned nothing. Today, Maj. Gen. Antonio Taguba said the Bush administration committed "war crimes." War crimes!

Imagine if a Democrat was accused of that? Now, how do you think the press is going to cover this (with the obvious exception of McClatchy Newspapers, whose coverage has been exemplary)? I guarantee you'll hardly hear a peep.

The Bush administration soiled the good name of America. Their ought to be a price for that. But they are just going to walk out of that White House as if they did nothing wrong. If that doesn't make you angry, you're not paying attention.

Young Turks on You Tube

The people of Eastern Iowa are experiencing what may be the worst flooding in state history. You'd expect that in times of distress like these, people would rally to help each other. But not in the new America, the land where money is everything and emergency response requires a contract.

Scott McClellan dropped another bombshell today. It turns out the man who ultimately authorized the leak of secret intelligence information was -- George W. Bush. As Bush was claiming he would not tolerate any intelligence leaks, he was leaking the intelligence himself.

Watch McClellan explain what happened exactly:




Remember what George H.W. Bush said about people expose the identities of our secret agents:




The most insidious of traitors, indeed.

Young Turks on You Tube

President George Bush has given up golf in honor of U.S troops in Iraq. During an interview with Politico and Yahoo News, Bush said his decision to give up his favorite sport came after the August 2003 Bombing of the United Nations headquarters in Baghdad. The bombing killed Sergio Vieira de Mello, who was the top U.N. official in Iraq.

Bush continued to say, "I don't want some mom whose son may have recently died to see the commander in chief playing golf. I feel I owe it to the families to be in solidarity as best as I can with them. And I think playing golf during a war just sends the wrong signal."

Good job Bush. We're proud of you.

Did the preseident think that revealing his "sacrifice" would result in the American people increasing their respect for him? Thousands of troops have given up their lives for the war in Iraq , and thousands more continue to risk their lives in the Middle East. Instead of thinking of ways to END the war, Bush decides giving up golf makes him a respectable and honorable president.



Watch TYT.

Jenna Bush married her longtime boyfriend this weekend on her family's Crawford ranch. By all accounts it was a lovely ceremony and a great party. Check out the photo gallery here. But one thing caught our eye in the description of the event:

"The Rev. Kirbyjon Caldwell of Windsor Village United Methodist Church in Houston officiated. The influential Houston minister, who is backing Barack Obama in his run for the White House, is a longtime spiritual adviser to the president."

Wow, President Bush is friends with an Obama endorser -- so much so that he's let him marry his own daughter. That seems so open-minded and bipartisan of him. So, what exactly brought Bush and Caldwell together?

President Bush was trying to explain what success in Iraq means to him, when as usual, he embarrassed himself (and the rest of us for electing him):





By the way, I should also note that there was no Al Qaeda in Iraq before we invaded and Iran's influence in Iraq has been greatly expanded since our invasion as well. So, we are now fighting a circular war in which we are battling the forces we helped to create by attacking Iraq in the first place. George W. Bush is the worst president ever.

Young Turks on You Tube

While sitting in my Political Behavior class for graduate school, my classmates and I found ourselves in a somewhat heated debate about the presidential elections. My professor pointed at a chart indicating that the independents vote will determine whether John McCain or Barak Obama will make it as president. This clearly illustrated that the best strategy for both candidates is to campaign with political ideologies that are as moderate as possible to get the large number of independents to vote for them.



Some of the students argued that John McCain would be more likely to get the independents vote because he is a "moderate conservative," while Barak Obama is on the far left with liberal ideals. But what the students failed to understand is that McCain is a full-blown left wing conservative, and there's nothing "moderate" about him. Although some media outlets might make him out to be a moderate conservative, the proof is really in the pudding. Don't believe me?

The front page of Huffington Post featured an article today that perfectly summarizes just how conservative John McCain really is. When it comes to every partisan issue, John McCain takes the right-wing stance indefinitely. Not only does he support the war in Iraq, but he also has served as a key ally in George Bush's efforts to increase U.S soldiers occupying the country. Other topics like abortion, gun control, and gay rights also illustrate that "moderate," is really not a descriptive word pertaining to the Republican candidate.

When it comes to abortion, McCain is a self-proclaimed pro-life advocate. He has vowed to appoint Supreme Court Justices that will limit the impact of the Roe v. Wade ruling, which basically legalized abortion. His views on gay marriage are just as conservative since he completely opposes it. In fact, he worked to ban gay marriage in Arizona and fully supports the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy. He even opposed legislation that would protect homosexuals from hate crimes and job discrimination. To top things off, he is an avid supporter of the National Riffle Association and has voted AGAINST a ban for assault-style weapons. But people consider him a moderate conservative?

Where is the logic in that?

Polls have indicated that most people do in fact see McCain as a centrist while Barak Obama and Hillary Clinton are perceived as far left candidates. Studies done by political scientists such as Philip Converse show that independents are typically less politically aware than strong Democrats or Republicans. This presidential election would perfectly illustrate that finding if the independents are naive enough to fall for McCain's "moderate conservative" tactics.

You gotta love Jesse Ventura. Look at what he says about George Bush, Dick Cheney and all the rest of the chickenhawks:





Watch The Whole Show Here and Watch Our You Tube Channel Here

Republican Presidential hopeful John McCain has traveled to the Middle East to endorse his foreign policy expertise. But while speaking to reporters in the Jordanian capital of Amman, he displayed a shocking level of ignorance.

McCain told reporters several times that al-Qeada, a predominantly Sunni militant group, has been receiving aide and training from Iran. Keep in mind Iran is mainly a Shiite country, and past reports have shown Sunnis and Shiites simply do not get along. They are even less likely to aide one another.

Despite the fact that McCain's statements were extremely false, he continued to say that it is "common knowledge and has been reported in the media that al-Qaeda is going back into Iran and receiving training and are coming back into Iraq from Iran, that's well known. And it's unfortunate."

Senator Joseph Lieberman was standing by McCain while he was speaking to reporters, and actually pulled McCain aside to whisper the correction in his ear. After Lieberman spoke to him, McCain said, "I'm sorry, the Iranians are training extremists, not al-Qaeda."

Aside from being somewhat comical, McCain's statements were scary. When comparisons are drawn between George Bush and McCain, the similarities are striking. But McCain's recent comments further confirm if he gets elected as president, he will serve as a continuation of Bush's idiocy.

McCain has mentioned his readiness to invade Iran. But how credible is his foreign policy experience when he isn't aware of the important issues in the Middle East? I would argue that someone who aspires to be the president of the United States should know everything possible about the situation in Middle East, and especially militant groups such as al-Qeada. But apparently not.

What's even more disappointing is the fact that people will continue to vote for McCain despite his ignorance.

Here's what Cenk had to say about it today on The Young Turks:




Watch TYT!

Recent headlines have definitely drawn attention away from conditions in the Middle East. For the past few weeks, topics swarming the media include Eliot Spitzer resigning after his rendezvous with prostitutes, Barak Obama's angry former pastor, and the chaos of our faltering economy. Once in a while we do get the privilege of hearing what truly goes on in the Middle East. I suppose right now will be one of those times.

A female suicide bomber has killed a total of 39 people, and injured an additional 54 after attacking a group of Shiite worshipers in Iraq. The worshipers were gathered at a mosque in Karbala, which is only a half mile away from the Imam Hussein Shrine. The site is known to be one of the holiest for the Shiites.

Photos of Iraqis mopping the blood-covered floor made me angry...mostly because there seems to be no real solution to what is transpiring in the Middle East.

But what baffles me the most is the fact that U.S troops have occupied Iraq for more than five years, and we see the same thing again and again. Religious factions continue to engage in violent attacks against one another, and billions of dollars continue to be spent on the war.

Vice President Dick Cheney and presidential hopeful John McCain met with Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki to talk about increasing the security between the U.S and Iraq, but did they talk about realistic solutions to the conditions within Iraq?

Hassan Khazim, who was wounded in the face when the female suicide bomber attacked said, "All the tight security measures designed to protect us were in vain."

After meeting with Nouri al-Maliki, McCain said, "Al-Qaida continues to pose a great threat to the security and very existence of Iraq as a democracy. So we know there's still a lot more of work to be done."

What I don't understand is what the "work to be done" is. What are the plausible solutions and why aren't Americans demanding answers to these questions?

Admittedly, reports show violence has decreased since President Bush's decision to deploy an additional 30 thousand troops to the war zone. But when you really put things in perspective, the U.S is spending billions of dollars and has already lost nearly 4,000 troops to a war that has shown minuscule progress.

We are taught to pick our battles in life. What made the Bush Administration pick this one? Iraq did not attack the U.S, but American citizens were tricked into believing Saddam Hussein was a one of the masterminds behind 9/11. In fact, the real mastermind continues to live on. What happened to finding him? Weapons of mass destruction were never found, but Americans were told that Iraq definitely had them.

Iraq is a bigger mess than people realize. The U.S economy is in shambles. Yet the Bush Administration has no problem blowing more on an endless battle.

The AP reports that President Bush is deep into the planning of his daughter Jenna's May wedding, and that he's been cracking jokes about it, as here to the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce:

"I had to face some very difficult spending decisions and I've had to conduct sensitive diplomacy. That's called planning for a wedding."

He's in charge of wedding diplomacy? Heaven help that poor girl and her fondant dreams.

He also explained his lateness by way of saying he'd been watching Father of the Bride and added that he'd need to finish his speech quickly to head home and finish watching it.

Is it just us, or does Bush appear to have more free time than anyone else in America?

Republican presidential front runner John McCain wants to convince the United States that the war in Iraq is succeeding...even though Northern Iraq is in complete peril. If he can't get the American people to accept the Iraq war, he says, " I lose. I lose."

Right after McCain made the statement to reporters from his campaign bus, he didn't take long to back-pedal. "If I may, I'd like to retract 'I'll lose.' But I don't think there's any doubt that how they judge Iraq will have a direct relation to their judgment of me."

McCain has been an avid supporter of the Iraq War, and makes clear that he intends on keeping U.S troops in the Middle East until the "War on Terror" is complete. He made a statement last month indicating that the troops could possibly be in Iraq for another 10,000 years, and his support of the military surge has been something he constantly boasts about.

McCain's Democratic rivals argue his candidacy would serve as a continuation of George Bush's failed policies. McCain has fought back, saying that withdrawing troops would be like waving the "white flag of surrender."

Although many Republicans still support the Iraq War, Democrats and Independents want out, and they have good reason to. The war in Iraq has been anything but a successful fight against terror. In reality, terror as only increased in the Middle East.

The Turkish military's web site says an additional 41 Kurdish rebels have been killed in a cross-boarder operation in Iraq. A total of 153 Kurds have died since the beginning of Turkey's incursion, with Turkish troops destroying rebel shelters and logistic centers.

In addition, a suicide bomber blew himself up in Baghdad on Sunday, killing 40 Shiite pilgrims and injuring 60. The bombing was the second attack of the day. Hours earlier extremists used guns and grenades to attack a group of Sunnis in another part of Baghdad. The attack killed three and wounded 36.

Bush's policies along with the Iraq war have been complete failures. McCain's denial is a great indication that if he makes it to the White House, the failures will live on.