WATCH: Fox News Host EXPLODES On Ex-CIA Guest For Making 1 Comment That Stuns Him – ‘Excuse Me?’

US airstrikes hit a Doctors Without Borders hospital in Kunduz, Afghanistan, and killed more than 30 staff members and patients on October 3rd of this year.

Doctors Without Borders, an international medical organization, released its initial review of the attack on Thursday, and stated that: “Patients were burned in their beds, medical staff were decapitated and lost limbs, and others were shot by the circling AC-130 gunship while fleeing the burning building.”

The Pentagon has called the bombing a “mistake.”

Barack Obama issued an apology to the organization several days after the attack.

On Thursday, Fox News host Shepard Smith invited an ex-CIA covert officer, Joshua Katz, on to his program to discuss the deadly airstrikes.

It didn’t take long for the clash between Smith and Katz to start.

Katz stated: “We have Doctors Without Borders who in all cases are actually providing material support to terrorists. They have knowingly and willingly admitted.”

Smith was startled by the comment, and quickly said: “Excuse me?”

Katz then said: “Doctors Without Borders here, Shep, has said that they have provided support to the Taliban.”

Smith began to argue back: “Oh hang on. What doctors do is treat the wounded in war zones since time began. Are you suggesting here that they should not have treated members of the–the ‘terrorists’ as you call them, when they were bleeding and at their doorstep. They should have said ‘No go away’?”

Smith then said he found Katz’s comment “disgusting.”

The two continued to argue throughout the segment.

What do you think of Katz telling Shepard Smith, in reference to the airstrikes, that Doctors Without Borders was “providing material support to terrorists?”

Wow: Trump Just Announced What He Would Do To Bergdahl- Bergdahl’s Attorney Responds…

When Donald Trump talks about Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, he has a different form of justice in mind than the military tribunal that the soldier accused of desertion could be facing.

“We’re tired of Sgt. Bergdahl, who’s a traitor, a no-good traitor, who should have been executed,” Trump told 1,600 people in a Las Vegas theater on Thursday.

“Thirty years ago,” Trump added, “he would have been shot.”

In Thursday’s speech, Trump continued his attack on Bergdahl, who has been charged with desertion and misbehavior before the enemy.

In August, Trump bitterly attacked the deal that freed Bergdahl, who spent five years as a captive under the Taliban. Bergdahl was freed in a controversial May 2014 prisoner swap that also freed five Taliban leaders from the U.S. military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

“We get a traitor named Bergdahl, a dirty, rotten traitor, who, by the way, when he deserted, six young, beautiful people were killed trying to find him,” Trump said then.

In exchange, Trump said, the enemy got “five of the people they wanted, five killers back on the battlefield. That’s the kind of deals we make.”

After his New Hampshire comments on Bergdahl, Trump did a brief pantomime of firing a rifle, as in a firing squad, while saying, “You know, in the old days… bing, bong. When we were strong.”

Bergdahl’s attorney, Eugene Fidell, said Trump “has become a broken record on this subject.”

“If he took the time to study what actually emerged at the preliminary hearing he would be singing a different tune,” Fidell said. Fidell has said that Trump deserves to be sued for defaming Bergdahl and has alleged that Trump’s comments could jeopardize a fair trial for his client.

The Army conducted a hearing on Bergdahl’s case last month. The results of that hearing have not been released. Bergdahl could face a court martial on the charges.

h/t: Fox News

Obama’s Middle East Mess Will Lead To Massacre, Crises For 2017 President

Numerous military sources report an impending disaster is just beyond the horizon.

Kabul, the capital of Afghanistan, will fall to Taliban forces and thousands of Afghans who have supported U.S. forces since the occupation began in 2001 could face tremendous suffering.

And the worst part is Commander-in-Chief Barack Obama knows it’s coming, and he’s decided protecting his legacy is more important than protecting the lives of innocent Afghan and American soldiers.

The dire situation in Afghanistan, especially in the region surrounding Kabul, is well-documented. On April 22, Taliban leaders announced they would dramatically increase their military efforts in the region, warning all “foreign occupiers” their forces are growing. In the following weeks, numerous well-orchestrated attacks hit multiple strategic targets.

On May 14, 14 people were killed in an attack on a Kabul hotel. On May 17, the Taliban organized an assault on a European Union vehicle, killing three. On May 19, a massive suicide car bomb killed at least six people in the parking lot of the Afghan Ministry of Justice.

Afghan President Mohammad Ashraf Ghani’s public support has waned in recent months due to the increasing presence and power of Taliban forces and his inability to strike a peace agreement with the terrorist organization, which many say is demanding a role in the government.

Ghani’s administration insists the nation is not on the verge of collapse, but as recently as March 2014, Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., whom Obama nominated to be the United States’ next chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff earlier this month, warned pulling troops out of Afghanistan would likely lead to the destruction of the U.S.-supported government in Afghanistan.

On May 13, John Sopko, the special inspector general for Afghanistan reconstruction, said in a speech before the Center for Strategic and International Studies, “The evidence strongly suggests that Afghanistan lacks the capacity—financial, technical, managerial, or otherwise—to maintain, support, and execute much of what has been built or established during more than 13 years of international assistance.”

Without further training and military support, Sopko warned, the $65 billion spent on the Afghan National Security Forces would be wasted.

Despite all of the signs indicating Afghan forces are not ready to take the reins on their own, Obama planned to continue reducing troops in 2015 down to 5,500, but was convinced to abandon the proposal after facing stiff opposition from military leaders.

Obama administration officials now plan to maintain current troop levels well into 2016, keeping just enough soldiers on the ground to prevent a collapse, but not providing enough military might to improve the dire situation.

In other words, Obama is no longer fighting to win, but he’s unwilling to face the political backlash that’s sure to come if Kabul falls to the Taliban the way much of Iraq has to ISIS. Obama is simply buying time until a new president takes office in 2017.

Meanwhile, U.S. soldiers continue to fight in a war they are destined to lose, and Afghans who have supported U.S. and U.N. forces must live their lives each day knowing their own military is ill-equipped to deal with future threats and that Taliban forces have slowly been building in regions surrounding Kabul.

Because of President Obama’s lack of leadership and lack of respect for the lives of all those involved in this tremendous struggle for freedom, thousands of innocent lives hang dangerously in the balance, and there’s no indication Afghans will be able to escape the very same horrific fate many in Iraq are now facing thanks to equally selfish decisions by Obama in that nation.

The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

What Will Soon Happen To The ‘Taliban 5′ Makes Bergdahl Trade Look Even Worse For Obama

The so-called “Taliban Five,” who were exchanged for Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl in May of 2014, could be free to re-enter the battlefield as early as Monday.

Bergdahl was charged with desertion in March of this year after disappearing from his post in Afghanistan in 2009.

By the terms of the exchange, the five fighters, who were hand-picked by the Taliban, were to remain in Qatar under government surveillance for one year following their release from Guantanamo Bay.

According to Fox News, at least three of the five have already sought to reconnect with their old terror networks since arriving in Qatar.

Joint Task Force Guantanamo, which oversees the facility, classified all five men as “high risk,” not eligible for release.

Among them is Abdul Haq Wasiq, who served as deputy minister of intelligence for the Taliban; Mullah Mohammad Fazi, deputy defense minister for the Taliban; Mullah Norullah Noori, a senior military commander; Mullah Khairullah Khairkhwa, a former provincial governor who reputedly met with Iran to plot attacks against American forces; and Mohammad Nabi Omari, who has held multiple leadership roles in various terrorist groups.

Many lawmakers believe if these men are allowed to leave Qatar, they will very likely return to the battlefield.

“It’s impossible for me to see how they don’t rejoin the fight in short order,” said Rep. Ed Royce, R-Calif., chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

“In Congress, we spent a lot of time debating whether the Qataris were going to adequately keep an eye on them in the course of the 12 months,” said Rep. Adam Schiff (Calif.), the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee. “My point all along was that I’m more worried about month No. 13 than the first 12.”

At the time of their release, Sen. Lindsay Graham, R-S.C., a member of the Armed Services Committee, said all the men “have American blood on their hands and surely as night follows day they will return to the fight.”

The Obama administration, which celebrated Bergdahl’s release with a Rose Garden ceremony, is reportedly in talks with Qatar to try to extend the Taliban Five’s travel ban; but as the deadline approaches, no agreement has been announced.

Joe Kasper, spokesman for House Armed Services Committee member Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., said his office has gotten “radio silence” from the administration when they ask about the issue.

“They have to be concerned with what happens to the five Taliban because they made every effort to portray the trade as a good deal,” Kasper wrote in an email to Fox News. “The nightmare scenario for the Administration is if any of these guys show up again within the global battlespace, be it in some kind of leadership position or just as messengers of threats or propaganda.”

At the time of the Taliban Five’s release, several lawmakers from both parties complained that the White House did not give a 30-day notice of the swap, which is required by law. The administration said they could not wait because Bergdahl’s life was in danger.

What do you think about the Bergdahl exchange? Did the Obama administration break the law? Share your thoughts below.  

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth

Taliban Kills 17 Despite Peace Talks

Image for representational purposes only.

Despite peace talks, Taliban militants attacked police checkpoints late Sunday night in the remote Afghan province of Badakhshan, killing at least 16 policemen. The insurgents said in a statement to media that the assaults were part of their annual spring offensive, which began late last month. According to the Associated Press, a Taliban suicide bomber struck a bus carrying government workers in the capital, Kabul, on Monday morning, killing one person and wounding 13. The Taliban also claimed responsibility for that bombing.

The Taliban launched their annual spring offensive on April 24 with an attack on the northern city of Kunduz, amid calls from Afghan President Ashraf Ghani for the group to join the government. During talks, Afghan officials believe negotiations are heading in the right direction. An Afghan official familiar with both sides in the Qatar discussions said: “It is a good starting point. We will ask them to go ahead prudently and wisely to find a political solution rather than intensify military activity, which is causing the loss of innocent life.” The official spoke on condition of anonymity because details of the discussions have not been made public.

Peace talks were hosted by the government of Qatar and the Pugwash Council, a global conflict resolution group, on Sunday and Monday, billed as unofficial and “not supposed to be any sort of negotiation.” The council issued a statement of “common points” that emerged during the talks, the most significant of which was probably the toned-down Taliban position on foreign forces in Afghanistan.

“Everybody agreed that foreign forces have to leave Afghanistan soon,” the Pugwash statement said. But in noting an apparent retreat by the Taliban from its insistence on full withdrawal of outside forces before formal peace talks can begin, the statement observed that “some expressed concern that there should be an agreement among Afghan political forces before the departure of the foreign forces.”

Both sides agreed that the Taliban should open a political office in Doha, Qatar, which would serve as a place where future negotiations might take place–and that the Constitution of Afghanistan was up for discussion.This was the first time in which both parties seemed willing to publicize their points of agreement.

Despite the Taliban’s recent aggression, Afghan officials do not believe it will stall negotiations.

This post originally appeared on Western Journalism – Equipping You With The Truth