Her leathery ass needs to keep on talking, diggin that hole. She is the poster child for "Change".

So... does this mean we tortured people or not ?

CIA records show the session was led by officials from its counterterrorism center, which at the time was run by Jose A. Rodriguez Jr., who later left the CIA amid questions about the destruction of videotapes of detainees being waterboarded.

Well, he seems pretty legit.

They told us stuff before we tortured them. Then we tortured them to get us to tell us stuff we wished were true.

And by "we" I mean "Dick Cheney and Halliburton."

He's going to jail

So, which liar should we believe?

I find it equally believable that Pelosi knew but didn't want to raise a stink and appear soft on defense/terrorism and/or the CIA is making shiat up to cover their asses.

Mordant: So... does this mean we tortured people or not ?

Silly- don't you know that the whole subject of torture is off the table now, except in the context of what Pelosi knew and when?

timmy_the_tooth: Then we tortured them to get us to tell us stuff we wished were true.

And by "we" I mean "Dick Cheney and Halliburton."

And what is so truly disgusting is they did it all in our name, or in the guise of working to protect us.

Mordant: So... does this mean we tortured people or not ?

We did. And those responsible should be held accountable. And if (and this is a big if...) Pelosi, as one of those that were supposed to be providing oversight to all the classified goings on, knew and did nothing she should be held accountable as well.

However, she's not the place to start the investigations, and this does kind of stink of hand-waving.

My biggest fear is that she was briefed and now the Democrats will have their hands tied by her culpability.

Guy Innagorillasuit: Pelosi, as one of those that were supposed to be providing oversight to all the classified goings on

Except they weren't able to provide oversight. True oversight means if you are told something you think is wrong, you have the ability to either stop it, or to publicize it so others may stop it. The members of congress were not able to do either.

Dinki: The members of congress were not able willing to do either.

Assuming they were actually briefed on the torture.

Dinki: timmy_the_tooth: Then we tortured them to get us to tell us stuff we wished were true.

And by "we" I mean "Dick Cheney and Halliburton."

And what is so truly disgusting is they did it all in our name, or in the guise of working to protect us.

This "to protect us" thing is one of the lines that perplexes me most. I hear Obama say it too; that his job is to "protect us."

Last time I checked, the oath of office said that his job was to protect the constitution, not the people.

Wait, yep, there it is

"and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

And last time I checked... yep, there it is, the constitution forbids torture.

"Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted."

So, torturing people in order to "save lives" even if it did work, would still be both illegal and not in his job description.

They sent her memos? Wow!

Anyone have any idea how many memos a congresscritter gets every single day?

If I went back in time to September 1, 2001, and sent them each a memo every single day that an attack was imminent on 9/11, and an email as well, I guarantee that the tiny fraction that actually got read, and the much tinier fraction that were taken seriously, would not have been acted upon, ever.

/And today you can't even find the tiniest hint that they ever existed.

//Fark 'em, they had their chance.

Guy Innagorillasuit: We did. And those responsible should be held accountable. And if (and this is a big if...) Pelosi, as one of those that were supposed to be providing oversight to all the classified goings on, knew and did nothing she should be held accountable as well.

I can understand why pelosi should be accountable, but wouldn't going after the people who were actually responsible just be a witch hunt ?

is this really the time to engage in the blame game (except for blaming a Dem, of course) ?

Guy Innagorillasuit: My biggest fear is that she was briefed and now the Democrats will have their hands tied by her culpability.

Her hands were tied before this, she couldn't exactly go out and tell the world Top Secret information, could she?

I think the most likely scenario is that congress was kind of sort of briefed so the Bush administration could say they didn't keep it a secret and that congress didn't ask for clarification so they could say they weren't told about torture.

Mordant: Guy Innagorillasuit: We did. And those responsible should be held accountable. And if (and this is a big if...) Pelosi, as one of those that were supposed to be providing oversight to all the classified goings on, knew and did nothing she should be held accountable as well.

I can understand why pelosi should be accountable, but wouldn't going after the people who were actually responsible just be a witch hunt ?

is this really the time to engage in the blame game (except for blaming a Dem, of course) ?

I pretty much answered that in the line after the ones you quoted.

Guy Innagorillasuit: he members of congress were not able willing to do either.

Assuming they were actually briefed on the torture.

The rules that were placed on these 'briefings' were such that they had no control at all. Now one can argue that the congress should have demanded more control, but since it was a republican controlled congress, it's unreasonable to place the blame for any of this on Pelosi and the Democrats.

And you're right I am willing to bet a years salary that what they were told was so vague and parsed so carefully that unless the congresspeople specifically asked exactly what was going on, they were probably not told.

timmy_the_tooth: Guy Innagorillasuit: My biggest fear is that she was briefed and now the Democrats will have their hands tied by her culpability.

Her hands were tied before this, she couldn't exactly go out and tell the world Top Secret information, could she?

"I am extremely worried about the legality and humanity of some of the interrogation techniques I've been briefed on and demand an immediate investigation" isn't giving away any secrets, is it? Maybe I missed that (I mean this in a non-sarcastic manner), but I don't remember hearing anything like that.

timmy_the_tooth: Guy Innagorillasuit: My biggest fear is that she was briefed and now the Democrats will have their hands tied by her culpability.

Her hands were tied before this, she couldn't exactly go out and tell the world Top Secret information, could she?

Excuse me?
its not like everyone involved was Ok with the situation . Several lawyers, CIA, FBI, and White house staff quit their jobs over this torture issue. Several high ranking lawyers working for white house quite their jobs because they tried and failed to bring to Bush's attention the reality of the situation.

She should have/ could have been one of those that would resign in protest. Or at least try to do something about it, instead of being a sack of lying dog shiat. She smiled about everything, and I say just like the US did the to the Nazi's convicted of waterboarding, that we hang all of them responsible. Starting with Cheney, and Yoo (not you, but Yoo the lawyer, no .. no you, Yoo!)

//this Yoo!
//hot like where the nazi's hanged for waterboarding are.

Dinki: The rules that were placed on these 'briefings' were such that they had no control at all. Now one can argue that the congress should have demanded more control, but since it was a republican controlled congress, it's unreasonable to place the blame for any of this on Pelosi and the Democrats.

I think it's entirely reasonable to blame them for their silence, regardless of their level of power at the time. Weren't Republicans briefed too?

I realize this current furor is motivated by partisan politics, but just because Pelosi (and the other Congress members that were briefed) isn't the first place start investigating doesn't mean she/they are free and clear.

Guy Innagorillasuit: I realize this current furor is motivated by partisan politics, but just because Pelosi (and the other Congress members that were briefed) isn't the first place start investigating doesn't mean she/they are free and clear.

What I'm really getting at in this thread is while the current attacks on Pelosi are politically motivated, defense of Pelosi should not be motivated by "she's one of ours". Again, until we know what they were briefed on, none of this matters, and congressional briefings is not where torture investigations should start, but it's damn sure part of what needs to be brought to light.

Dinki:
And you're right I am willing to bet a years salary that what they were told was so vague and parsed so carefully that unless the congresspeople specifically asked exactly what was going on, they were probably not told.

then you would lose that year.
In her book (Dark side), Jane Mayer explains how these meetings included every detail regarding how the Prisoners of War were treated. details such as how many times a towel was to be wrapped around a POW's head so they could throw him against the wall most effectively. To how long the waterboarding sessions should last....
(new window)

im not sure if she was attending during those meetings, but her smile tells me she was enjoying it like everyone else.

I can understand holding any Dems responsible because they really should know better, but as 3_butt_cheeks proves repeatedly it's a waste of time to treat Republicans as adults and hold them accountable for anything at all.

Seriously. Go after Pelosi and then drop the whole thing.

timmy_the_tooth: Then we tortured them to get us to tell us stuff we wished were true.


Which orifice did you pull this little factoid out of? Please site a legitimate source to back this claim up.

I'm fine with going after Pelosi. AFTER we go after Bushie and company for actually authorizing it. Don't you idiots realize that going after her just gives more proof for putting you all on trial for war crimes?

bigpeeler: timmy_the_tooth: Then we tortured them to get us to tell us stuff we wished were true.


Which orifice did you pull this little factoid out of? Please site a legitimate source to back this claim up.

Link It is a Huffington post article, but there's a pair of pdf reports linked in it.

Guy Innagorillasuit: bigpeeler: timmy_the_tooth: Then we tortured them to get us to tell us stuff we wished were true.


Which orifice did you pull this little factoid out of? Please site a legitimate source to back this claim up.

Link It is a Huffington post article, but there's a pair of pdf reports linked in it.

**licks thumb,
***checks wind
ehem... Huffington post is a lefty propaganda tool!

trouzourt

His head would look really good in a noose.

bigpeeler

Which orifice did you pull this little factoid out of? Please site a legitimate source to back this claim up

The techniques themselves are designed to elicit false confessions. There's lots of crumbs out there leading to this conclusion. Google it.

trouzourt: Guy Innagorillasuit: bigpeeler: timmy_the_tooth: Then we tortured them to get us to tell us stuff we wished were true.


Which orifice did you pull this little factoid out of? Please site a legitimate source to back this claim up.

Link It is a Huffington post article, but there's a pair of pdf reports linked in it.

**licks thumb,
***checks wind
ehem... Huffington post is a lefty propaganda tool!

They don't trust video of the people they do respect if the video is linked in Huffington or Kos, that link was a waste of time.

http://democrats.com/

You may as well send Dracula a recipe from garlic.com

But Democrats, as well as some former intelligence officials, warn that the documents are far from definitive and reflect only after-the-fact recollections from CIA briefers who never intended to produce full transcripts of the sessions. "You can have a lot of interpretation either way," said Rep. C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger (Md.), who said he "sped-read" the documents this week.



so the CIA used weasel words and typical corporatespeak to gloss over the details. Pelosi knew what they were doing though and is/was relying on the intentionally vague language to give her enough wriggle room to dodge the issue.

*sigh*

What I want to know is why we aren't holding more people responsible for this crap. I want to know why the CIA isn't putting people on trial. Ok, if you want to go after Pelosi that's fine....but I don't want to stop there. I want all the torturing bastards tossed into a supermax prison for life.

It's always fascinating to watch the evolution of an argument:

"We don't torture"
"We waterboard, but that's not torture"
"OK, that's torture, but it can stop a ticking time bomb"
"OK, it didn't actually stop any ticking time bombs, but it got us good info"

That's pretty revealing.

Mordant

http://democrats.com/

You may as well send Dracula a recipe from garlic.com

Sorry, Google popped that source up first.

I don't recall seeing it reported on FOX, but here's another source, and another, and another.

And here's Lawrence Wilkerson himself talking.

WAIT A MINUTE!

"We're fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them over here."

If only torture prevented attacks here, then that quote IS A LIE.

vygramul: It's always fascinating to watch the evolution of an argument:

"We don't torture"
"We waterboard, but that's not torture"
"OK, that's torture, but it can stop a ticking time bomb"
"OK, it didn't actually stop any ticking time bombs, but it got us good info"

That's pretty revealing.

"aren't you pro-life?"
"well...yeah."
"So how can you reconcile a philsophy that says 'all life is sacred' with your political views that say 'torture brown people until they confess'?"
"um...well...mmmMMMTERRORIST! YOU'RE WITH THEM, AREN'T YOU!? SAY IT! SAY IT! WWWARRRRRGHARGHLEWAAARG!" [runs away screaming]

Weaver95: Ok, if you want to go after Pelosi that's fine....but I don't want to stop there. I want all the torturing bastards tossed into a supermax prison for life.

Ding.

Pelosi is not an innocent victim here, but she is far far far from the most culpable. Dick Cheney has been all over the media lately, all but saying "WE TORTURED PEOPLE". Start with him first. Then watch where the dominoes fall. Pelosi tumbles too, good. If not, oh well.

Weaver95: "aren't you pro-life?"
"well...yeah."
"So how can you reconcile a philsophy that says 'all life is sacred' with your political views that say 'torture brown people until they confess'?"
"um...well...mmmMMMTERRORIST! YOU'RE WITH THEM, AREN'T YOU!? SAY IT! SAY IT! WWWARRRRRGHARGHLEWAAARG!" [runs away screaming]

you're too coherent with that last part.

Where this threads going, and what Pelosi's thoughts might look like if we could see them.

GAT_00: Don't you idiots realize that going after her just gives more proof for putting you all on trial for war crimes?

This is an angle I'm not quite sure they get. This whole "we should have this debate" thing is almost funny, if it weren't so retarded. As if this were even debatable. The only debate there will be is that they did commit torture and it is illegal. Not exactly a cunning plan.

As with 99% of politicians, I don't believe a word that comes out of pelosi's mouth

Pelosi was likely briefed along with a lot of other members of Congress. That's all anyone can be sure of. What happened during those briefings is very much a he said/she said situation.

Pelosi, and other members of Congress, please use this as a learning moment to take the concept that shutting the hell up often has a huge benefit both to the individual doing the shutting up, and everyone else around them.

What the fark does this have to do with anything? The GOP and its water-carriers in the media will never stop. George W. Bush and the real president during his tenure, Dick Cheney, are the ones who authorized this, and executed it. Why when and what Pelosi knew matters is irrelevant.

It's like the last episode of Seinfeld, you know? Convicting Pelosi for criminal indifference?

They all crooks!

Look, Mr. and Mrs. Fark Smary Pants... if America does torture, than why would we go through all the trouble/costs to Extraordinary Rendition people to countries that torture for us by proxy?

If America tortures people, wouldn't the CIA just do all the sodomization and anethesialess surgery themselves instead of sending them to Egypt and Syria et al?

pacified: It's like the last episode of Seinfeld, you know? Convicting Pelosi for criminal indifference?

It's bringing the outrage and turning it around. The same way we berate and mock the GOPers for suddenly turning around and condemning gross deficit spending after more than a few years of going gangbusters themselves. The way we mock the GOPers for their 'tax cuts' plans when their prior versions there of were detrimental to the nation and horribly skewed against the middle and lower classes.

They are wading into the ring o' hypocrisy and doing their best to paint Pelosi as exactly that, a hypocrite.

If Pelosi knew what was going on, that makes torture OK, right?

pacified: What the fark does this have to do with anything? The GOP and its water-carriers in the media will never stop. George W. Bush and the real president during his tenure, Dick Cheney, are the ones who authorized this, and executed it. Why when and what Pelosi knew matters is irrelevant.

It's like the last episode of Seinfeld, you know? Convicting Pelosi for criminal indifference?

I think they're hoping that if they can drag Pelosi into the mix, the Democrats won't aggressively pursue criminal investigations.

That said, we do need to know what they were briefed on and when. Either to prosecute the liars in the CIA or expose our congresspeople as cowardly shiatbags. But that'd be several layers down into an investigation the Democrats probably don't have the stones to pursue anyway.

"You can have a lot of interpretation either way," said Rep. C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger (Md.), who said he "sped-read" the documents this week.

GIS for sped-read