• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Nancy Under Heat

Mike

Well-known member
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Thursday accused the CIA of misleading Congress about its use of enhanced interrogation techniques used on terror detainees.

"Yes I am saying the CIA was misleading the Congress and at the same time the (Bush) administration was misleading the Congress on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, to which I said that this intelligence doesn't support the imminent threat," Pelosi said at her weekly news conference.

"Every step of the way the administration was misleading the Congress and that is the issue and that's why we need a truth commission," she added.

Under a barrage of questioning, Pelosi also again adamantly insisted that she was not aware that waterboarding or other enhanced interrogation techniques were being used on terrorism suspects and

"I am telling you they told me they approved these and said they wanted to use them but said they were not using waterboarding," she said.

Growing increasingly frustrated throughout the briefing, Pelosi slowly started backing away from the podium as she tried to end the questioning. As she backed out, she continued to accuse the CIA of not telling Congress that dissenting opinions had been filed within the administration suggesting the methods were not lawful.

Pelosi said she was only briefed once on the interrogation methods in September 2002 and acknowledged that her intelligence aide, Michael Sheehy, informed her about another briefing five months later in which Bush officials said waterboarding was being used on CIA terror detainee Abu Zubaydah.

Pelosi said she supported a letter drafted by Rep. Jane Harman, D-Calif., the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee who also attended the briefing in February 2003, and sent to the Bush administration, raising concerns over the technique.

Pelosi's account has changed several times in recent weeks as she has sought to clarify what she did or didn't know about these interrogation methods that she is pushing to investigate.

Pelosi said last month that she was never told that the controversial interrogation methods were being used. But a national intelligence report showed that she was briefed seven years ago on the tactics while she was on the House Intelligence Committee.

Her spokesman then said the speaker thought the techniques were legal and waterboarding was not used.

Democrats will hold a series of hearings on Justice Department memos released last month that justified rough tactics against detainees, including waterboarding, simulated drowning, and sleep deprviation.

While Democrats want the hearings to focus on what they call torture, Republicans have tried to turn the issue to their advantage by complaining that Pelosi and other Democrats knew of the tactics but didn't protest.
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
I saw a news conference or something of the sort....and she was all over the place and really nervous with the questions she was getting.


If she knew....she should fess up and say exactly what she knew. It's on paper......so she may have her tail caught in the crack now for sure.
 

Mike

Well-known member
kolanuraven said:
I saw a news conference or something of the sort....and she was all over the place and really nervous with the questions she was getting.


If she knew....she should fess up and say exactly what she knew. It's on paper......so she may have her tail caught in the crack now for sure.

Culture Of Corruption? :wink:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
During the replay of the hearings last night- some of the Congressmen made note that they were made aware of what was happenging with many secret issues- almost always after the fact- but also done so under security clearances so they were unable to speak out publicly- or even to some extent discuss the matter between their fellow Congressmen- as they had no idea who was briefed and who wasn't..

They cited one instance when Senator Rockefeller was briefed that Bush had authorized illegal wiretapping...Rockefeller objected mightily to the Administration- but to no avail- but under the current security guidelines could not even voice his objections publicly or in Congress-- so he handwrote an objection which he sent the President and kept the other under lock and key so that he had proof of his objecting to the decision...

Lindsey Graham did a good job of summing up the torture issue-- it was WRONG- and the US should not lower ourselves to those standards...But that in times of war we do impetuous things- like locking up hundreds of thousands of Japanese descent American citizens.....
Too me its just the way Bush operated his entire reign- if there was a law there he didn't want to follow he just went out and found an attorney that would write an opinion for him (altho 100's of others said it was wrong) and go with the 1 opinion he liked....

SEN. LINDSEY GRAHAM, R-S.C.: They saw the law many times as a nicety that we couldn't afford, so they took a very aggressive interpretation of what the law would allow, and that came back to bite us. It always does, but that's not a crime.

The FBI agent testifying-Ali Soufan- said that all the info that was received from some of these top Al Quaeda suspects that were waterboarded- was received PRIOR to their being waterboarded-and that in cases the waterboarding/torture made them clam up and quit cooperating-- and that some of the memos and statements by the Administration about the info being gained from waterboarding are false...It was actually gained before they were tortured....

Testimony by Rices' aide-PHILIP ZELIKOW- and by several top military officers who had served in Iraq was also read into the record-- that stated the torture of detainees was actually a detriment to US actions and troops in Iraq as that 90% of the foreign freedom fighters or suicide bombers caught or killed had been recruited using the US's torture and Guantanamo as their excuse for joining into the fight....

The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in the insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well meaning but without understanding.
Louis D. Brandeis

It appeared to me the Repubs (and Graham was the only Repub with cajones enough to attend the hearing :roll: ) are going to take the defense that "Yes GW- and his crew were bumbling doofuss's- but they were well meaning bumbling doofuss's- and so then if they went around the law- or wrongly interpreted the law we should just write that off as the idiots they were and call it a little mistake- and not worry about if crimes were alledgedly committed"....

Pretty well sums up the entire Bush Presidency....Screw up- "the Fundamentals of the Economy are Strong"------then go DUH as Rome burns around you !!
 

Mike

Well-known member
As usual, when OT has no defense on the topic at hand, he'll change the subject to fit his agenda. :roll:

Looks like Nancy lied. Of course..... you'll have no problems with that tho'.

It's just something ya'll do every chance you get? :lol: :lol:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Big Muddy rancher said:
Gee OT the internment of the Japanese was done by your old buddy FDR. :?

Yep-- that was the point- and that Earl Warren who was California Governor at the time and later became one of the most liberal SCOTUS Chief Justices- along with then Justice Hugo Black all approved of it at the time when the country was in a state of fear and hysteria....

But then as time went by they began reallizing their mistake- and even made up military units of Japanese American soldiers recruited out of the same internment camps---and as years and history has went on came to realize the whole thing was probably a huge mistake....

Interestingly it was also brought up that one person that opposed the Japanese internment was J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI- the same as the current FBI and most the Justice Department has vehemently opposed the Bush administrations regression to the use of torture....

Since even tho later it was adjudged that these peoples Constitutional rights had been violated- and the FDR administration broke the law- but noone was charged for committing these crimes--Senator Graham was using these arguments to try and justify why GW and his crew should not be charged now for their overreaction- even if it was illegal....

The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in the insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well meaning but without understanding.
Louis D. Brandeis


Our government... teaches the whole people by its example. If the government becomes the lawbreaker, it breeds contempt for law; it invites every man to become a law unto himself; it invites anarchy.
Louis D. Brandeis

To declare that in the administration of criminal law the end justifies the means to declare that the Government may commit crimes in order to secure conviction of a private criminal would bring terrible retribution.
Louis D. Brandeis

As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals.

Our founding fathers faced with perils that we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man, a charter expanded by the blood of generations.

Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience's sake.

~ President Obama 01/20/09
 

TexasBred

Well-known member
OT

Too me its just the way Bush operated his entire reign- if there was a law there he didn't want to follow he just went out and found an attorney that would write an opinion for him (altho 100's of others said it was wrong) and go with the 1 opinion he liked....

lol, even the 9 justices on the supreme court seldom have a 9-0 verdict.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nc-TRKqHqNg&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fhotairpundit.blogspot.com%2F2009%2F05%2Flindsey-graham-on-foxnews-pelosi-wants.html&feature=player_embedded
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
WASHINGTON – President Obama’s national intelligence director told colleagues in a private memo last week that the harsh interrogation techniques banned by the White House did produce significant information that helped the nation in its struggle with terrorists.

“High value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided a deeper understanding of the al Qa’ida organization that was attacking this country,” Adm. Dennis C. Blair, the intelligence director, wrote in a memo to his staff last Thursday.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/22/us/politics/22blair.html?_r=1
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Ali Soufan, a former FBI counter-terrorism agent and interrogator, testified that President George W. Bush and Justice Department lawyers were wrong when they said that waterboarding and other tactics used on one suspect provided key pieces of intelligence about Al Qaeda after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

Testifying from behind a screen to protect his identity, Soufan said the techniques, touted by the Bush administration as perhaps its most effective weapon against terrorism, were actually slow, ineffective and unreliable.


He said that he and a CIA agent gleaned much, if not all, of the crucial information from suspected Al Qaeda chieftain Abu Zubaydah before the coercive techniques were initiated, including information on the key role of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed in the Sept. 11 attacks and the plot by alleged dirty bomber Jose Padilla.

Soufan, now a private security consultant, also said that outside contractors working for the CIA were the ones who used the coercive tactics, and that he and the CIA official working with him protested. The use of harsher methods by the contractors backfired, Soufan said, prompting Zubaydah to stop talking.

"I totally disagree with the assertion that there was a conflict between FBI and CIA. They were 100% supportive," Soufan said of the on-site CIA officials. "The chief psychologist objected to these techniques and left the location even before I did."

Asked whether Bush's public comments in 2006 about the effectiveness of the "enhanced" techniques were accurate, Soufan said, "My impression is that the president was told a half-truth."
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
hypocritexposer said:
OT, this soufan guy should take this up with Obama and Dennis Blair, obviously he knows something they don't.

If the CIA releases those memos, we'll see who is right, Cheney or Soufan. With Cheney leading the charge to bring them out, my dollar is on Dick.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
hypocritexposer said:
OT, this soufan guy should take this up with Obama and Dennis Blair, obviously he knows something they don't.

Thats the reason its going to take an investigation by an Independent Appointed Prosecuter- or a Commission with subpeona power to get all the answers...

I'm really split on it- the law enforcement in me says those that threw out the rule of law- and those that openly/admittedly authorized violating the Constitution should be investigated and charged....

BUT

All it does is further divide this badly divided country- and while I don't agree often with Nancy Pelosi- I think she was right by not bringing Impeachment charges against GW- altho most Constitutional attorneys agreed there was way more than enough evidence- because she didn't want to further divide the country.... And smartly she left the decision to the voters/public who rendered their verdicts in Nov of 06 and 08....
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
I'm really split on it- the law enforcement in me says those that threw out the rule of law- and those that openly/admittedly authorized violating the Constitution should be investigated and charged....

The "Judge" in you should wait for full disclosure, before you make judgement!
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
hypocritexposer said:
OT, this soufan guy should take this up with Obama and Dennis Blair, obviously he knows something they don't.

Thats the reason its going to take an investigation by an Independent Appointed Prosecuter- or a Commission with subpeona power to get all the answers...

I'm really split on it- the law enforcement in me says those that threw out the rule of law- and those that openly/admittedly authorized violating the Constitution should be investigated and charged....

BUT

All it does is further divide this badly divided country- and while I don't agree often with Nancy Pelosi- I think she was right by not bringing Impeachment charges against GW- altho most Constitutional attorneys agreed there was way more than enough evidence- because she didn't want to further divide the country.... And smartly she left the decision to the voters/public who rendered their verdicts in Nov of 06 and 08....

After watching Pelosi for the past few years and seeing what she supports and how she operates, there is no way anybody could convince me that Pelosi would ever hold back on anything that she though she could gain from even if it would rend the country to pieces. The woman has absolutely no scruples. None. Zero. If she didn't go after Bush, it was because she didn't think she would win or she thought she would be collateral damage.
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Testifying from behind a screen to protect his identity, Soufan said the techniques, touted by the Bush administration as perhaps its most effective weapon against terrorism, were actually slow, ineffective and unreliable.

Hey OT? Is this the guy that says that the information they gained about 9/11 and the terrorists, through these interrogations, was unreliable. Are we supposed to believe the intelligence about 9/11 or not? Who flew those planes into the WTC?

What's your next conspiracy theory going to be? Maybe there should be another 9/11 commision.

"More than one-quarter of all footnotes in the 9/11 Report refer to CIA interrogations of al Qaeda operatives subjected to the now-controversial interrogation techniques," writes former NBC producer Robert Windrem in The Daily Beast. "In fact, information derived from the interrogations was central to the 9/11 Report’s most critical chapters, those on the planning and execution of the attacks."

http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/05/13/report-much-of-911-commissions-findings-cite-intelligence-garnered-by-torture/
 

Mike

Well-known member
because she didn't want to further divide the country....

WTF? Her whole passion has been to divide the country.........


Left against Right. Please don't try to convince ANYONE that Nancy is a statesman. PUH-LEEEEEZE :roll:
 
Top