dick, That's nice. Would you now like to address my post?
On May 10, 12:15 am, dick thompson <[email protected]> wrote: > But the republicans are not lying about their having been briefed. The > democrats areand are trying to use this to railroad the lawyers who > wrote memos interpreting the law as they saw it when pres Bush asked for > an interpretation. Totally different thing. It is the games that the > democrats are trying to play that are so junior high school. They are > trying to get certain memos released and ones that show how involved > they were held back. This is the same type of thing that Sen Stevens > prosecutors did and the judge slapped them down for it. Release some > info and hold other info back and then lie about it. Starting to seem > like a real MO for the democrats these days. > > > > Hollywood wrote: > > 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, > > ... > > 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. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
