dick, If it's NOT a crime, or at the VERY least highly unethical, what would be the big deal about not reporting and/or publically opossing it? You do realize that everything you are saying about the Democrats holds equally true for the Republicans that were also informed at the same time don't you?
I'm sorry, are we in junior high school? What's with the "loser" label? On May 9, 11:00 pm, dick thompson <[email protected]> wrote: > Given the position of the people involved and the actions they could > have taken on the issue, it is more than their not reporting what you > choose to call a crime. It is that their not reporting it implied > strongly that they did not consider it a crime at all. Now they choose > to say I never got the briefing or since that option has been shown to > be a lie that they assumed it to be a future option rather than it > having been already done. That they were told it had been done to the > people we know were given waterboarding puts that to a lie as well. I > just wonder what else they will attempt to do to make it seem that they > were lily white on the issue. Everything they have said so far has been > shown to be a lie. > > The other problem is that at the time all these "terrible" things > happened this was not a crime and since waterboarding is a natural part > of the training of the Navy Seals that one looks to be a loser as > well. The congressmen are trying to twist the stories even more than > Clinton with his "depends on the definition of what is is" bit of > nonsense. Doubt that that will sell either. It appears that the public > is behind the CIA on this one and the crown princess of Botox looks to > be past her sell by date on the issue. > > > > Hollywood wrote: > > bruce, > > > Sorry, but I don't get your point here. > > > You want to condemn people for NOT reporting a crime but you do not > > want to condemn or punish the people who actually committed the > > crime???? > > > On May 9, 10:00 pm, bruce majors <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> CIA memo cites 40 Congressional briefings on torture By Bill Van Auken > > >> A memo released Wednesday by Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair > >> lists 40 separate briefings beginning in September 2002 in which leading > >> members of Congress were briefed by the CIA on the agency’s use of > >> “enhanced > >> interrogation techniques”—in plain words, torture. > > >> Before the revelations about the employment of such methods as > >> waterboarding > >> appeared in the media, none of these legislators, including leading > >> Democrats, objected to or publicly protested against what amounted to war > >> crimes. > > >> Blair’s release of the document compiled by the CIA came in response to a > >> request from Representative Pete Hoekstra of Michigan, the top Republican > >> on > >> the House intelligence committee. In a letter to Hoekstra, Blair stated > >> that > >> the memo “provides a straightforward account of the extent of interaction > >> with the Congress on this issue.” > > >> Much of the media attention has focused on the role of House Speaker Nancy > >> Pelosi (Democrat, California), who as the ranking Democrat on the House > >> intelligence committee was, together with Republican Representative Porter > >> Goss, who went on to become director of the CIA, one of the first members > >> of > >> Congress to be briefed on the CIA’s torture tactics. > > >> The memo’s description of the briefing reads: “Briefing on EITs [enhanced > >> interrogation techniques] on Abu Zubaydah, background on authorities, and a > >> description of the particular EITs that have been employed.” > > >> Zubaydah, captured by the CIA in Pakistan in March 2002, was one of the > >> first “high-value” detainees subjected to waterboarding and other forms of > >> torture. While the Bush administration grossly inflated Zubaydah’s > >> importance, the torture methods served to extract from him a false > >> statement > >> that Iraq was training Al Qaeda terrorists in the use of chemical weapons. > >> The Bush administration had ordered the torture in large part to obtain > >> such > >> a phony confession in order to bolster its key pretext for launching its > >> war > >> of aggression against Iraq. > > >> The memo’s description of this initial briefing of Pelosi and Goss > >> contradicts Pelosi’s own account. Just last month, she claimed that the CIA > >> “did not brief us that these enhanced interrogations were being used,” but > >> merely informed the two intelligence committee leaders about “an array of > >> interrogations that they might have at their disposal.” > > >> This claim is hardly credible. Why would the CIA brief two leading members > >> of Congress on methods of torture in the abstract? And if they had done so, > >> why didn’t Pelosi ask them whether these “techniques” were in fact being > >> used on detainees captured on the “global war on terrorism”? > > >> Other briefings listed in the memo included one in February 2003 in which > >> Republican Senator Pat Roberts and Democratic Senator John Rockefeller had > >> the EITs “described in considerable detail,” including “how the water board > >> was used.” > > >> In briefings held in September 2003, Roberts and Rockefeller, as well as > >> Republican Congressman Goss and Pelosi’s successor on the House > >> intelligence > >> panel, California Democratic Congresswoman Jane Harmon, were given slide > >> shows in which “non-enhanced and enhanced interrogation techniques were > >> named, described and compared on the same slide.” > > >> Subsequent briefings, which included Senator Harry Reid, now the Democratic > >> Senate Majority Leader, and the other Democratic members of the Senate > >> Select Committee on Intelligence—Senators Carl Levin, Dianne Feinstein, > >> Evan > >> Bayh, Barbara Mikulski and Russ Feingold—heard presentations on > >> “waterboarding, diet manipulation, nudity, walling and stomach slap.” > > >> The content of the memo is hardly a revelation. In December 2007, the > >> *Washington > >> Post* reported that in 2002 briefings Pelosi and three other members of > >> Congress were “given a virtual tour of the CIA’s overseas detention sites > >> and the harsh techniques interrogators had devised to make prisoners talk,” > >> including waterboarding. The *Post *added that while leading Democrats > >> subsequently denounced waterboarding as torture, “on that day, no > >> objections > >> were raised. Instead, at least two lawmakers in the room asked the CIA to > >> push harder.” > > >> The patent aim of the congressional Republicans in requesting the public > >> release of the record of these briefings is to intimidate Democrats into > >> dropping the issue of torture, by threatening to focus public attention on > >> Democratic complicity in the implementation of the criminal methods > >> introduced under the Bush administration. > > >> The issue has divided Washington since President Barack Obama last month > >> released Justice Department memos authorizing the use of these illegal > >> methods, while simultaneously announcing a blanket amnesty for those in the > >> CIA who carried them out. > > >> Obama has since informed Democratic leaders in Congress that he is opposed > >> to any independent investigation of the torture carried out under the Bush > >> administration, while publicly stating that the matter is in the hands of > >> his Attorney General Eric Holder. The administration and the majority of > >> the > >> Democratic leadership in Congress have also deferred to an inquiry being > >> conducted by the Senate intelligence committee, which will not be completed > >> until the end of the year. The probe will be conducted behind closed doors, > >> and it is uncertain how much of its findings will be made public. > > >> In an appearance on Capitol Hill Thursday, Attorney General Holder dealt > >> with the issue of the torture memos. His testimony before the Senate > >> Appropriations Committee came just a day after the *New York Times* > >> reported > >> that a draft report issued by the Justice Department’s Office of > >> Professional Responsibility had concluded that the government attorneys who > >> wrote memos declaring specific methods of torture to be legal were guilty > >> only of poor judgment and should not be criminally prosecuted. Holder, > >> however, claimed not to have read the document. > > >> Republican Senators Lamar Alexander of Tennessee and Richard Shelby of > >> Alabama pointedly questioned Holder about the implications for the > >> Democrats > >> themselves of any serious investigation into the question of torture. > > >> “What about members of Congress who were informed of them or knew about > >> them > >> or approved them or encouraged them, wouldn’t they also be appropriate > >> parts > >> of such an investigation?” asked Alexander. > > >> Holder responded: “Our desire is not to do anything that would be perceived > >> as political, as partisan. We do want to look forward to the extent that we > >> can do that.” He added, however, that where “we see violations of those > >> laws, we’ll take the appropriate actions.” > > >> Shelby turned to the CIA’s rendition program, in which suspects are > >> kidnapped off the street and transported to secret prisons abroad for > >> interrogation and torture. > > >> “Didn’t that happen during the Clinton administration?” he asked. Holder > >> acknowledged that rendition had been employed under the former Democratic > >> president. > > >> “How many did you approve?” he continued, referring to Holder’s role at the > >> Clinton Justice Department. Holder responded that he would have to consult > >> his records. > > >> The Obama administration has specifically defended rendition as a practice > >> that the CIA will continue using, effectively “disappearing” those who it > >> deems a threat to the US government, transporting them to foreign prisons > >> to > >> be held indefinitely, denied the right to either be charged with a crime > >> and > >> placed on trial or be released. > > >> The Republican campaign is based on the well-founded charge that the > >> Democrats were complicit in the introduction of torture as a policy of the > >> US government and therefore are in no position to hold former officials of > >> the Bush administration accountable. > > >> The media has largely adopted this standpoint, casting the issue as one > >> based primarily on partisan > > ... > > read more »- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
