To what extent has the US breached ICCPR Article 7 on rendition?

This essay investigates the extent to which the United States has breached Article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) through its involvement in extraordinary rendition. It defines extraordinary rendition and explores its evolution, differentiating between pre- and post-9/11 practices. The essay examines the US's aggressive counter-terrorism policies post-9/11, detailing the patterns, practices, and victims of rendition, including black sites, secret detentions, and the use of CIA flight companies. It analyzes the historical development of human rights law and the prohibition against torture, focusing on relevant articles of the ICCPR, particularly Article 7. The analysis considers legal arguments, the doctrine of non-refoulement, and the extraterritorial scope of the ICCPR. The essay concludes by assessing the implications of extraordinary rendition under Article 7 and considering the legal justifications presented by the United States. It includes case studies such as Maher Arrar and Abu Omar, providing a comprehensive overview of the topic.

To what extent has the United States of
America breached Article 7 of the
International Covenant on Culture &
Political Rights based on its involvement in
extraordinary rendition?

Contents
CHAPTER 2: UNITED STATES INVOLVEMENT IN EXTRAORDINARY RENDITION 4
2.2 What is Extraordinary Rendition?....................................................................................4
2.3 Extraordinary Rendition, Pre-9/11 or Post 9/11?.............................................................5
2.4 Extraordinary Rendition; a United States post 9/11 aggressive Counter terrorism policy
................................................................................................................................................6
2.5 Gloves off: The Pattern, the practice and the victims......................................................7
2.6 Reach and Scope of the Practice....................................................................................12
2.7 Black Sites and Secret detentions..................................................................................13
2.8 Transfer and transportation – CIA bogus flight companies...........................................17
2.9 Other Countries involved – Forced or voluntary?..........................................................18
2.10 Conclusion....................................................................................................................19
CHAPTER 3: HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF HUMAN RIGHTS LAW AND
PROHIBITION AGAINST TORTURE..................................................................................20
3.1 Introduction....................................................................................................................20
3.2 Historical development of human rights law and prohibition against torture................20
3.3 Conclusion......................................................................................................................26
CHAPTER 4: EXTRAORDINARY RENDITION AND ITS IMPLICATION UNDER
ARTILCE 7 OF ICCPR...........................................................................................................27
4.1 Introduction....................................................................................................................27
4.2 Articles of ICCPR..........................................................................................................27
4.3 Provision to derogate under Article 4 of the ICCPR......................................................27
4.4 What is Public Emergency?...........................................................................................28
4.5 Extraordinary Rendition and the doctrine of Non Refoulment......................................29
4.6 Article 7 and the Doctrine of Non Refoulement............................................................30
4.7 Doctrine of Non- refoulement and Extraterritorial Scope of Application.....................31
4.8 Secret detention, Ghost detainees and Extraterritorial Scope of Application under
ICCPR..................................................................................................................................34
4.9 Conclusion......................................................................................................................37
5.1 Introduction....................................................................................................................39
5.2 Legal arguments by United Stated of America..............................................................39
5.3 International armed conflict between two or more High Contracting Parties to the
Geneva Conventions............................................................................................................41
5.4 There is partial or total occupation of the territory governed by the Geneva
Conventions..........................................................................................................................42
5.5 Afforded protected person status under the Conventions..............................................43

5.6 Rights and protections are afforded to those protected persons.....................................44
5.7 Conclusion......................................................................................................................45
REFERENCES.........................................................................................................................46

CHAPTER 2: UNITED STATES INVOLVEMENT IN
EXTRAORDINARY RENDITION
2.1 Introduction
Main focus on this chapter is made on understanding and exploring practice of
extraordinary renditions. Further, it also includes the practices that are followed by US as per
ICCPR1. In addition to this, all the characteristics of extraordinary rendition that contains
black sites, torture through proxy, Ghost detainees, etc. are also discussed.
2.2 What is Extraordinary Rendition?
In accordance with research conducted, it can be stated that there are no
internationally agreed definition for extraordinary rendition. However, it can be simply
defined as a condition in which an individual is transferred from one country to another
secretly through illegal channels. It should not be confused with extradition as it is the legal
transfer of an individual or someone suspected of committing a crime from one country to the
other. This is done at the request of the receiving country by fulfilling all legal and due
administrative process.2 Extradition is carried out under a well safeguarded judicial process
with the suspect affording the opportunity to legal representation and can challenge any
decision of the extradition process that they deem unfavourable.3 On the other hand,
extraordinary rendition is an extra judicial governmental transfer of an individual, most times
suspected terrorist from a foreign country by the United States of America without legal or
legal procedure. It is an irregular abduction, enforced for disappearance and then transfer of
suspects to a third world country for interrogational purposes where they are more than likely
to be tortured and exposed to all sorts of inhumane and degrading treatment.4 It was in the
year 1987 when foreign rendition was taking place by US. An airline hijacker, Fawaz Younis
was abducted from Italy and was bought to US. President of US during those time was Bill
Clinton who authorised extraordinary rendition to nations who were known for practicing
torture and this was known as torture by proxy.
Targeted individual are often seized in a foreign country based on the intelligent
gathering of United States Intelligence and investigative agencies like the CIA (Central
1 Boys, J.D., 2011. What's so extraordinary about rendition?. The International Journal of Human Rights. 15(4).
pp.589-604.
2 James D. Boys (2011) What's so extraordinary about rendition?, The International Journal of Human Rights, 15:4, Pg 589-604
3 Murray, Mark J (2011): Extraordinary Rendition and U.S. Counterterrorism Policy." Journal of Strategic Security4, no. 3 : Pg 15-28
4 Ibid

Intelligence Agency), FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigations and the DSS (Diplomatic
Security Services).
2.3 Extraordinary Rendition, Pre-9/11 or Post 9/11?
Although it is very difficult to ascertain when US began extraordinary rendition, but it
is certain that it became heightened during post 9/11 based on the US aggressive
counterterrorism policy against enemy combatant5 (suspected Terrorist). According to Aziz
Z6 extraordinary rendition evolved out of the practices from 9/11 that only became a
purposeful way for the United States evade prohibition against torture. 7Aziz who was a
former CIA agent in charge of 9/11 Counter terrorism even traced Extraordinary Rendition to
1800 as a policy that was used in United States for rendering criminal suspects from oversea
countries to be tried in the courts of US. According to him, this practice continued from 1993
when Ramzi Youseff, the mastermind of the world trade bombings was arrested by the
Pakistani Intelligence in Islamabad and subsequently they handed over to the United States
for trial in a Federal Court of New York Southern District.8 Consequently, pre 9/11 rendition
was mainly transferring suspected caught for terrorism to United States for trial that was
supported by President Bill’s Clinton, executive order given by him that “When terrorists
wanted violation of US law at large overseas, their return for prosecution shall be a matter of
highest priority… If we do not receive adequate cooperation from a state that harbours a
terrorist whose extradition we are seeking, we shall take appropriate measures to induce
cooperation. Return of suspects by force may be effected without the cooperation of the host
government, consistent with the procedures outlined”.9 Testifying before the senate in 1998.
The former FBI director Louis J Freeh confirmed that “During the past decade, the United
States has successfully returned 13 suspected international terrorists to stand trial in the
United States for acts or planned acts of terrorism against U.S. citizens…”10
However, in same year, as part of wider counter terrorism program, things changed a
bit as United States began rendering suspects to third world countries where the goal was not
necessarily trial but to keep them in custody, out of circulation and out of reach from US
5 James D. Boys (2011) What's so extraordinary about rendition? The International Journal of Human Rights, 15:4, Pg 589-604
6 Frederick A, et al (2007) Unchecked and Unbalanced, Presidential Power in a time of Terror, Brennan Centre for Justice, New York
Press. Pg 98 -150
7 Murray, Mark J (2011): Extraordinary Rendition and U.S. Counterterrorism Policy." Journal of Strategic Security4, no. 3 : Pg 15-28
8 Frederick A, et al (2007) Unchecked and Unbalanced, Presidential Power in a time of Terror, Brennan Centre
for Justice, New York Press. Pg 98 -150
9 James D. Boys (2011) What's so extraordinary about rendition?, The International Journal of Human Rights,
15:4, Pg 589-604
10 Former FBI Director Louis J Freeh appearing United State Congressional Hearings on Intelligence and
Security in September 1998

courts where they had access to every legal remedy available.11 The reason why there was a
change in policy was due to unnecessary media scrutiny and rigid judicial procedure to get
suspected terrorist prosecuted and after a CIA proposed plan of bringing suspected terrorist to
US and to hold them as prisoners of war did not gain presidential approval. Michael Schuer,
head of the CIA, stated that for Osama bin Laden Unit they began rendering suspects to third
world countries like Egypt, Yemen and Jordan.12 An example of a suspect rendered pre 9/11
was Talaat Fouad, a key leader and spokesman of an Egyptian Islamic sect called lGamaa al-
Islamiyah in Croatia. Quassem was reported to be seen in Egypt in the year 1996.13 The
question that need to be asked is the purpose of transferring rendering suspected terrorist pre-
9/11 to third countries, mainly Yemen, Syria, Egypt and Jordan. While, according to the
George tenet, the purpose was to ensure the suspected terrorist stood trial and not for the
purpose of torture or debriefing through inhuman and degrading treatment. He stated that
“Since July 1998, working with foreign governments worldwide, they have helped to render
more than two dozen terrorists to justice. More than half were associates of Usama bin
Laden’s Al-Qaeda organization.”14 Amnesty international asked the CIA to provide details of
those that were rendered and those that stood trials but they never responded. It is not actually
that important if the statement is true or not, but what is important is that post 9/11
extraordinary rendition was simply a continuation of a shady policy that has no modicum of
transparency policy put in place during pre-9/11.15
2.4 Extraordinary Rendition; a United States post 9/11 aggressive Counter terrorism policy
The 9/11 terrorist attack on US soil, first of its kind, arguably ushered almost a decade
long of human right violations carefully and thoroughly orchestrated or say spare headed by
an allied country (US) since world War 2. The 9/11 attack expanded extraordinary rendition
changed in scope, scale, purpose and practice. The statement of intent from Vice President
Dick Cheney gave an insight to the extend United States of America was willing to go in its
counter terrorism fight to not only avoid another terrorist attack of 9/11 on US soil but to
bring its punish the perpetrators.
11 Frederick A, et al (2007) Unchecked and Unbalanced, Presidential Power in a time of Terror, Brennan Centre
for Justice, New York Press. Pg 98 -150
12 Murray, Mark J (2011): Extraordinary Rendition and U.S. Counterterrorism Policy." Journal of Strategic
Security4, no. 3 : Pg 17
13 Ibid
14 FBI Agent appearing before the US Senate Committee on Intelligence in 2000
15 USA: Below the radar - Secret flights to torture and ‘disappearance’ Amnesty International 5 April 2006 , Pg
23

“We also have to work, through sort of the dark side, if you will. We have to spend time in
the intelligent world. A lot of what needs to be done here will be done quietly without any
discussion using methods that are available to our intelligence agency if we’re going to be
successful. That’s the world these folks operate in, and so it’s going to be vital for us to use
any means at our disposal, basically, to achieve our objective…”16
The above statement by the Vice President of US was made on September 16, 2001 and was
metastasized in action on September 17, 2001 when President George Bush signed a secret
presidential order that gave the CIA power to kill, capture and detain suspected terrorist
anywhere in the world.17 The order also authorised the secret offshore detention known as
black sites where CIA can send suspected terrorist by using coercive interrogation methods
deemed illegal in the United States. Furthermore, the presidential gave power to the CIA to
transfer and render suspected terrorist without case by approving it from the white house. The
implication of the executive order is that the extraordinary rendition became a program that
was exclusively owned by the CIA and sometimes with the help of other United States
Defense and intelligent institutions.
2.5 Gloves off: The Pattern, the practice and the victims.
Early allegation of United states involvement in Extraordinary Rendition was
vehemently debunked by United States of America. President Bush firstly responded to the
allegations which stated that United States of America do not torture and will not condone
torture anywhere in the world and will not torture any within the fifty states of it territories
and the other two provinces.18 Former Secretary General also accentuated when questioned in
one of trips to Germany, she stated that “The United States does not permit, tolerate, or
condone torture under any circumstances”. It was the “policy” of administration, that “the
United States does not transport, and has not transported, detainees from one country to
another for the purpose of interrogation using torture.... “.19 However, it is identified that
there are different cases both inside and outside of US were torture has taken place. In this, it
includes US military, US intelligence agencies, US public organizations, etc.
16 Former US Vice President responding to the 9/11 terrorist attack on US soil
17 Frederick A, et al (2007) Unchecked and Unbalanced, Presidential Power in a time of Terror, Brennan Centre for Justice, New York
Press. Pg 120
18 Kyriakou, N., 2012. The International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced
Disappearance and its contributions to international human rights law, with specific reference to extraordinary
rendition. Melb. J. Int'l L. 13. pp.424.
19 Bernstein, B., 2010. Over Before It Even Began: Mohamed v. Jeppesen Dataplan and the Use of the State
Secrets Privilege in Extraordinary Rendition Cases. Fordham Int'l LJ. 34. pp.1400.

Evidence and reports have been gathered through investigative journalism and
international human right groups like Red Cross and Amnesty International. Although not
official reports from government parastatals as many of the official activities remained
classified under the US law. There reports analytically cannot be faulted or disputed because
of the sequence of events and testimonies from many victims of extraordinary that are not
only collaborative but most times leads to more revealing to the extent of the practice of
extraordinary rendition. In this context, below given are some of the cases that has happened
in during post 9/11:
Maher Arrar
The first case of Post 9/11 that was reported of Syrian born Canadian Engineer that
illustrated the difference between normal extradition and extraordinary rendition. Maher
Arrar was arrested in September 2002 by the United States secret service at the JFK airport
while returning from a Vacation without access to legal counsel. Arrar was held at Brooklyn
detention centre on suspicion of having links with Al Qaeda.20 Arrar was first transferred to
Jordan against his will and subsequently shipped to a Syrian prison. He was detained for
nearly a year without been charged for any offence. The 35-year-old Engineer recount been
repeatedly beaten with thick cables and often threatened with electrocution during
interrogation about any links with Al Qaeda.21
Abu Omar
Abu Omar was abducted in Milan by the CIA in February 2003. At the time of his unlawful
abduction, he was under investigation but was not been charged for any case. He was
forcefully arrested while on his way to a Mosque from his house in Milan. An eyewitness
confirmed that a Western looking man in sun glasses near a van manhandled.22 On this bases
Abu Omar was dragged into a van by Italian officials. After months of investigating the
Italian investigators in the spring of 2004 intercepted phone calls that Abu Omar had placed
from Egypt to his wife and a Colleague. He recounted the ordeal of his arrest - stopped by
Italian looking men claiming to be police officers asking for any form of I.D. Before he could
produce any he was sprayed by a chemical substance and bundled into a Van. He was driven
20 Weissbrodt, David et al (2006) Extraordinary Rendition and the Torture Convention. Virginia Journal of
International Law, Vol.; Minnesota Legal Studies Research Vol. 46, Pg 583
21 Satterthwaite, Margaret (2006) "Rendered Meaningless: Extraordinary Rendition and the Rule of Law”. New
York University Public Law and Legal Theory Working Papers. Paper 43. Pg 46 -49
22 Weissman, S.R., 2010. An extraordinary rendition. Intelligence and National Security. 25(2). pp.198-222.

mouth taped for about five hours to a United States Air Base.23 In the call placed to his
colleague Abu confirmed that he was interrogated with torture about his links with Al Qaeda
and repeatedly asked if involved in recruiting new members for the dreaded Sects. Next
morning, after his capture he was placed on a US military aircraft to another military airbase
in Germany where he was put on US Gulf Stream executive jet to United States en-route to
Egypt. There he was blindfolded and transferred to various secret detention for stern
interrogation, after turning down the offer of becoming an informant for Egyptian
Intelligence. There he was tortured, hung upside down and electric shocked was administered
on his genitals. Abu Omar was released after fourteen months abduction due to failing health
but not until after a detailed account of his arrest and torture written by him was smuggled
out of prison to the press. The only time Abu Omar had anything close to freedom was when
he made calls that was intercepted by the Italian Investigators.24
Jamil Quasim Seed Mohammed
The account of Jamil Mohammed is entirely from Press reports. He was alleged to
have involvement in the bombing of USS Cole in 2000. The microbiology Student was
reportedly apprehended by Pakistani intelligence authorities in October 2001 and was handed
over to the US Authorities in the remote area of Karachi airport.25 At the airport he was
blindfolded, shackled and bundled in a US registered Gulf Stream aircraft and flown to
Jordan in the middle of the night. The same Gulf Stream jet that transferred Jamil had
reported to have involvement in numerous other transfer of extraordinary rendition victims.
Plane logs that were obtained by London Sunday times established that the same Gulf Stream
had made at least 49 trips transferring victims to countries that includes Jordan, Yemen,
Libya and Uzbekistan.26 This reports show that there are different type of ways that are
implemented by government of US to torture people and there are also cases in which just on
the basis of doubt people were tortured.
Khaled el Masri
23 Spaulding, N. W., 2010. Independence and Experimentalism in the Department of Justice. Stan. L. Rev. 63.
pp.409.
24 Murray, M. J., 2011. Extraordinary Rendition and US Counterterrorism Policy. Journal of Strategic
Security. 4(3). pp.15.
25 Weissbrodt, David et al (2006) Extraordinary Rendition and the Torture Convention. Virginia Journal of
International Law, Vol.; Minnesota Legal Studies Research Vol. 46, Pg 588
26 Steven R. Ratner (2007) Predator and Prey: Seizing and Killing Suspected Terrorists Abroad, The Journal of
Political Philosophy: Volume 15, Number 3, 2007, pp. 251–275

Khaled el Masri, a Kuwait born German was forcefully arrested in December 2003 on
his way to Macedonia, Ulm in Germany. His passport was confiscated and he was detained
for three weeks.27 In December 2004, a jet with registration number N313P that was
registered to a company called Premier Executive transport carrying El Masri arrived in
Macedonia from Majorca. From the Island of Majorca, El Masri was driven to Skopje airport
and was handed over to CIA official. He was beaten up by men wearing black masks and
gloves, he was stripped of his clothes and injected with drugs. He was then placed on another
flight to Baghdad in Iraq and then to Kabul. While in Kabul he was interrogated by US
officials and was held in solitary confinement for five months. In May 2004, el Masri was
flown back to Europe and was casually released at a checkpoint near the Albanian border
without any charge. It turned out to be that el Masri arrest was that of mistaken identity. 28
Muhammed Haydar Zammar
The disappearance of Muhammed Haydar Zammar has the Hallmark of torture by
proxy.29 Muhammed Zammar a Syrian born German National was suspected to have links
with Hamburg Al Qaeda cell who planned the 9/11. Muhammed Zammar was arrested by the
German authority but with little or no evidence to prosecute he was released30. In October
2001 Muhammed Zammer left Germany for Morocco travelling on Germany passport, before
leaving Morocco Intelligence authority at Casablanca airport based on tip off by US
intelligence.31 He was interrogated by US intelligence for two before been shipped off to
Syria on a Gulf stream jet N379P. While in Syria he was tortured and US government sent
written questions to be asked during the interrogation, although US denied any knowledge of
Muhammed Zammar transfer to Syria, a US official later confirmed that they were aware of
his transfer and detention but did not give details if they facilitated the transfer to Syria.
Murhaf Jouefati, an expert in Intelligence and Syrian politics confirmed before the 9/11
commission that a high figure of the 9/11 plot September plot was arrested in Morocco and
transferred to Syria for interrogation with the knowledge of America.32
27 Amrit Singh (2003) Globalizing Torture, CIA secret Detention and Extraordinary Rendition, National
Security and Counterterrorism, Open society Foundations. Pg 1-215
28 Bellaby, R., 2012. What's the Harm? The Ethics of Intelligence Collection. Intelligence and National
Security. 27(1). pp.93-117.
29 USA: Below the radar - Secret flights to torture and ‘disappearance’ Amnesty International 5 April 2006
30 D’Arcus, B., 2014. Extraordinary rendition, law and the spatial architecture of rights. ACME: An
International Journal for Critical Geographies. 13(1). pp.79-99.
Natalie, D. J., 2011. No longer secret: overcoming the state secrets doctrine to explore meaningful remedies for
victims of extraordinary rendition. Case W. Res. L. Rev. 62. p.1237.
31 Ibid
32 Amrit Singh (2003) Globalizing Torture, CIA secret Detention and Extraordinary Rendition, National
Security and Counterterrorism, Open society Foundations. Pg 1-215

Throughout the time Muhammed Zammer and his subsequent transfer was not known
by German authority. When the news broke up in the Media they went to Syrian and found
Muhammed Zammer who was interviewed since three days. No details of his interrogation
were released and a German Report was quoted saying “no court operating under the rule of
law would ever accept an interrogation conducted in a Damascus prison notorious for its
torture practices”.33 In 2003 A Moroccan National released from the same Far Falastin a
Palestine branch of Damascus intelligence confirmed that Muhammed was tortured by Syrian
officials. While a CIA agent from US, Robert Baer was sent to Damascus so as to interrogate
Muhammed Zammer but was told he was not with them anymore meaning he has been
transferred again to Palestine giving credence to the Moroccan national released from Far
Falastin. The Same Robert Baer later confessed on a Swedish Television that “…there was
not enough evidence obviously that he broke US law, but we still wanted him off the streets
so we arranged with the Moroccan government to have him arrested and then sent to Jordan
and to Syria where he is either dead or alive, I don’t know. With the Syrians engaging in
torture, there are no bones about it…”34
Released detainees from the same prison Muhammed Zammer was held in the Far’
Falastin confirmed that since he got to the detention he has been torture every day. His
underground cell was lice and rat infested, the cell was believed to be 185cm long, less than
90cm wide, and under 2m high. No bed mattress in the cell but only a couple of fifthly
blankets and duvet.35 Amnesty International later reported that fresh air and sun light was
restricted to the prison, he was left with two bottles, one for water and the other for urinating.
Former detainees also confirmed that Food provided was barely enough to keep anybody
alive and most times rotten resulting to break out of diarrhoea that leads numerous death.
Torture and other inhumane and degrading treatment are commonly reported at Far’ Falastin
and at least 40 methods of torture have been established by Red Cross to have been used on
detainees in Far’ Falastin.36
2.6 Reach and Scope of the Practice
It is very difficult to ascertain the number of individuals United States who were
extraordinarily rendered or have been involved directly or indirectly. However, in 2015
according to New York Times, no less than a thousand people have been extraordinarily
33 Ibid
34Ibid
35 Ibid
36 Weissbrodt, David et al (2006) Extraordinary Rendition and the Torture Convention. Virginia Journal of
International Law, Vol.; Minnesota Legal Studies Research Vol. 46, Pg 588

rendered. From the cases above, the scope of practice are clear as day light- that
extraordinary rendition is a hybrid violation of human rights, that involves combined
elements of arbitrary arrest or abduction, enforced disappearance, forceful transfer, denial of
access to legal counsel, interrogation through torture. Extraordinary Rendition is a US
Sponsored policy of abduction from a foreign country with or without the cooperation of the
country where the abduction was done. It is a practice by the United States of America to
avoid moral or legal complicity both at home and abroad.37
Further, there are number of methods used by United States of America for
Extraordinary Rendition. It includes intentionally outsourcing of torture to third world
countries where individual is more than likely to be tortured, Ghost detainees, use of secret
detention known as black sites, coercing third World Countries to participating actively or
passively in the practice and Use of unregistered flights to facilitate smooth running of the
program.
Outsourcing of Torture
“We don’t kick the [expletive] out of them. We send them to other countries so they can kick
the [expletive] out of them” 38
“If you want a serious interrogation you send a prisoner If you want them to be tortured,
you send them to Syria. If you want someone to disappear – never to see them again – you
send them to Egypt”39
Another crude tool used by the CIA during the practice of extraordinary rendition was
the outsourcing torture. During the period, United States knowingly and routinely sent
suspected Terrorist to countries were they violate international human rights so that they can
be tortured. Notable among countries, United States have transferred suspects is Egypt,
Yemen, Jordan and Syria.40 The most notorious of them is Egypt who have had at least 150
suspected terrorists transferred to be interrogated under torture and all manner of inhumane
and degrading treatment under the sun. 41Ararr, El Masri and Abu Omar have all been victims
of outsourcing torture or torture by proxy.
37 Ibid
38 Former CIA agent making an unofficial comment to Washington Post
39 Ibid
40 Amrit Singh (2003) Globalizing Torture, CIA secret Detention and Extraordinary Rendition, National
Security and Counterterrorism, Open society Foundations. Pg 1-215
41 Hersh, J., 2013. Extraordinary rendition report finds more than 50 nations involved in global torture
scheme. Huffington Post. 5.