Should Nancy Pelosi or Porter Goss be Tortured to Save the Constitution?

JimDuensing

New Member
Joined
May 11, 2009
Messages
1
From: http://www.jimduensing.com/should-n...oss-be-tortured-to-save-the-constitution.html


The controversy this weekend over what Nancy Pelosi knew and just when she knew it is heating up.

Documents from the cia indicate that as early as September 4th, 2002, both Porter Goss and Nancy Pelosi were jointly briefed by the cia about the torture techniques which had been employed during the “interrogation” of a suspected member of Al Qaeda.


Here is a pdf of the an unclassified memo about a series of such briefings.

The public debate over the Establishment Media channels has centererd merely on whether Pelosi was told that a technique of drowning someone during “enhanced interrogation”, termed waterboarding, was 1) going to be used or 2) already had been used.

Pelosi's current recollection of the events of that briefing were stated by spokesman Brendan Daly who said "The speaker was briefed only once, in September 2002. The briefers described these techniques, said they were legal, but said that waterboarding had not yet been used."

For argument's sake, let's take Pelosi at her word – or rather her spokesperson's word. She's been rather tight lipped on the subject lately. But, let's give her the benefit of the doubt and assume she only knew that the Bush / Cheney administration was claiming the legal right to drown people in a secret detention center in Communist Cuba - but that they hadn't done it - yet.

If just that much of her story is true, Pelosi had a moral and legal obligation, as the ranking Democratic member of the so-called “House Intelligence Committee”, to defend the American Constitution against domestic enemies of freedom who were – and still are – willing to trample the freedoms that brave Americans have fought and died to secure.

Torture is not an American value.

Freedom and a respect for human rights – even and especially the rights of those held and awaiting trial – are fundamental American values. It's what makes us better than the evil ones.

Now, let's analyze the question the Establishment Media is kicking around, namely was Pelosi briefed that torture by drowning had already been used.

Here's what the LA Times had to say:

A chart compiled by the CIA indicates that Pelosi (D-San Francisco) was briefed on Sept. 4, 2002, on the agency's interrogation of alleged Al Qaeda operative Abu Zubaydah, and that the session covered "the particular [enhanced interrogation techniques] that had been employed." The chart does not list the specific methods covered during the briefing. But during the preceding month, the CIA had used the simulated drowning technique known as waterboarding on Abu Zubaydah at least 83 times, according to a Justice Department memo released last month.

83 times prior to the briefing? And, they never mentioned it to the congressional heads of the House Intelligence Committee?

It's interesting to note that the other person briefed simultaneously with Pelosi was Porter Goss her Republican counterpart, then Chair of the House Intelligence Committee.

Prior to that meeting, when already serving on the House Intelligence Committee, Goss was infamous for having met with the so-called bagman of 9/11 on the very morning of the terrorist attacks.

Later, Goss was appointed to head the cia.

Pelosi's claim of ignorance doesn't pass the smell test as Chris Matthews would say.

The two ranking members of the House Intelligence Committee are briefed about torture techniques. One of the two soon becomes the head of the agency they were overseeing that was providing the briefing – and they don't tell them torture had already been used?

I don't buy it.

Goss claims the so-called gang of four, which included himself, Pelosi, Bob Graham and Richard Shelby, were briefed and all gave bi-partisan support to the cia's systematic torture of detainees.

Something in my gut tells me that's accurate.

But, luckily, we don't need to rely on my or even Stephen Colbert's gut on this one. We don't even need to rely on the word of Pelosi or Goss.

Pelosi already now admits to knowing that your government claimed the right to secretly torture people with suspected ties to the evil ones. Her silence; her failure to sound the alarm and warn the American people about this threat to American liberty automatically disqualifies her from any position of leadership in the people's house.

So, here's what I propose:


The Civilized Option

A. Pelosi keeps her seat, but resigns her leadership position.

B. Pelosi immediately calls for American sanctioned torture to cease.

C. Pelosi immediately calls for an open investigation into the cias destruction of evidence regarding its systematic practice of torture.

OR

The Torture Option

Both Pelosi and Goss be strapped to a gurney and drowned until their stories officially match about what was said at the briefing just prior to the one year anniversary of 9/11.

I sincerely hope most Americans are opposed to the Torture Option. In truth, I am. However, it is precisely what Pelosi and Goss favor with regard to other enemies of the Constitution.

But then again, maybe I'm just suffering from a pre-9/11 mindset.

Perhaps Dick Cheney is right, it could save hundreds of thousands of lives.

With Goss' links to funding terrorism and Pelosi's aid and comfort to the enemies of American freedom, perhaps waterboarding them both is the only appropriate solution in a post 9/11 world.

And, if it's only “enhanced interrogation”, they have nothing to fear.
 
Werbung:

Andy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Messages
3,497
No she shouldn't. None of them should. What should happen is, the left needs to shut up about it all being on Bush. The entire leadership of congress, democrats, republicans, liberals, conservatives, and everyone in between, all knew, all accepted that this was a needed and neccesary action.

The answer is no. Nothing needs to be done. What needs to be done, is for political partisan idiots need to shut up about it. There was nothing illegal about it, nothing wrong with it, and no action is required for it. Grow up. Get a life. Move on.
 

Mr. Shaman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Messages
7,829
The controversy this weekend over what Nancy Pelosi knew and just when she knew it is heating up.

"Both Pelosi and Goss be strapped to a gurney and drowned until their stories officially match about what was said at the briefing just prior to the one year anniversary of 9/11."
So, now.....this is going to do what, to hold Bush/Cheney accountable for initiating war-crimes?

Even the suggestion that Pelosi would go to Bush/Cheney, and "file a complaint"...only to hear:"So?"....is laughable. The Oligarchs were running the asylum.

:rolleyes:
 

Mr. Shaman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Messages
7,829
No she shouldn't. None of them should. What should happen is, the left needs to shut up about it all being on Bush.
Soooooooooooooo.....after "conservatives" (continally) insisted that Bill Clinton was responsible for everything that happened under his Watch...it's now "different", for The Idiot Son??

Sorry.

Stupidity still isn't a valid-excuse.

:rolleyes:
:
 

Mr. Shaman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Messages
7,829
Perhaps Dick Cheney is right, it could save hundreds of thousands of lives.
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.....so that's what he's doing....a Victory Dance!!!


:rolleyes:

"And as history slowly accepts that this man disgraced his office more profoundly than any before him, as it sinks in that this man did not merely make mistakes, as all flawed politicians do, but committed war crimes, with pre-meditation and elaborate subterfuge, he slowly realizes what's happening to him. He can feel it. And so he resists the way he always resists - by lashing out, attacking, smearing, snearing, and grabbing every inch of the limelight he can."​

:cool:
 

Mr. Shaman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Messages
7,829
The entire leadership of congress, democrats, republicans, liberals, conservatives, and everyone in between, all knew, all accepted that this was a needed and neccesary action.
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Looks like you're wrooooooooooooooooooooooong, AGAIN.....SKIPPY!!!

:p

"The White House has decided to declassify and release a classified 2004 CIA report about the torture program that is reported to have found no proof that torture foiled any terror plots on American soilhttp://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/t...il-torture-report-that-could-undercut-cheney/directly contradicting Cheney’s claims. The paper cites “allies” of the White House as a source."​
 

Andy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Messages
3,497
Soooooooooooooo.....after "conservatives" (continally) insisted that Bill Clinton was responsible for everything that happened under his Watch...it's now "different", for The Idiot Son??

Sorry.

Stupidity still isn't a valid-excuse.

:rolleyes:
:

Your response, and my post, are not in any way related. Nor did I say Bush wasn't responsible for something that happened under his watch. If there is an "idiots son", it's likely a House of Politics poster that I always end up replying too.
 

Andy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2008
Messages
3,497
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Looks like you're wrooooooooooooooooooooooong, AGAIN.....SKIPPY!!!

:p

From the actual article the idiots son cited...

Although some useful information was produced, the report concluded that "it is difficult to determine conclusively whether interrogations have provided information critical to interdicting specific imminent attacks,"

Difficult to determine, doesn't mean it didn't happen. Of course that's a logical conclusion....
 

Carlo Rossi

New Member
Joined
May 12, 2009
Messages
4
I'm sure Barack Obama could have gotten the same information from the terrorists by giving them an iPod and some Blockbuster DVDs.
 
Werbung:

Mr. Shaman

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2007
Messages
7,829
From the actual article the idiots son cited...

Difficult to determine, doesn't mean it didn't happen. Of course that's a logical conclusion....
Uhhhhhhhhhh......that was "...difficult to determine conclusively...", Skippy....you know, like Guilty; beyond a reasonable-doubt.

Ya' ever hear of that phrase, Skippy?

:rolleyes:
 
Top