House Speaker Pelosi
In September 2002, four members of Congress met in secret for a first look at a unique CIA program designed to wring vital information from reticent terrorism suspects in U.S. custody. For more than an hour, the bipartisan group, which included current House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), was given a virtual tour of the CIA’s overseas detention sites and the harsh techniques interrogators had devised to try to make their prisoners talk. Among the techniques described, said two officials present, was waterboarding, a practice that years later would be condemned as torture by Democrats and some Republicans on Capitol Hill. But on that day, no objections were raised. Instead, at least two lawmakers in the room asked the CIA to push harder, two U.S. officials said. “The briefer was specifically asked if the methods were tough enough,” said a U.S. official who witnessed the exchange.
Congressional leaders from both parties would later seize on waterboarding as a symbol of the worst excesses of the Bush administration’s counterterrorism effort. The CIA last week admitted that videotape of an interrogation of one of the waterboarded detainees was destroyed in 2005 against the advice of Justice Department and White House officials, provoking allegations that its actions were illegal and the destruction was a coverup. Yet long before “waterboarding” entered the public discourse, the CIA gave key legislative overseers about 30 private briefings, some of which included descriptions of that technique and other harsh interrogation methods, according to interviews with multiple U.S. officials with firsthand knowledge.
Sounds to me like the CIA got a “green light” for this program.
#1
So basically, you have no spine. This is article illustrates the hypocrisies on *both* sides and the best you can do is babble more Bush hate? When it is Republican’s approving of it, they are evil, when it is Democrats, they were coerced by the “evil Bush/Cheney war machine.” Absolute hypocritical bullshit. If you feel that waterboarding is torture, then grow a pair and stand up for that. That means condemning *all* that endorsed it, especially Democrats since you they are the party you favor.
#7
> do you really expect anyone to publicly
> criticize the “War” effort at that time
If you have a spine and believe in what you fight for, yes.
#25
What are you suggesting? They could not take notes so they got amnesia once the 30 various briefings were over? Nonsense. They knew as did the Republicans on the same committees.
#28
> It says they were “briefed”, but not
> allowed to take notes,
> consult with lawyers or confer even
> with their own staff
> members.
Yes, and that means they were fully aware of the practice and did not speak out against it. What would these illustrious notes have said? “Note to self. Waterboarding is bad. Do something Monday.”? It is not like there was a briefing or two. There were over 30.
If you truly think the practice is reprehensible, then the fact that you are in a secure briefing should not stop you. They could have worked to make the practice known publicly. They could have condemned the practice on the floor of Congress. There are many things that someone with a conscious could have done to stop the practice if they so chose.
> I seriously seriously doubt the CIA told
> the total truth to
> these congresspeople. But we can’t even
> know that much
> because of the creepy-as-hell secrecy of this
> administration.
Then that means all the Republicans on the committees are *also* not culpable. In fact, that could include everyone in the Bush Administration. After all, the CIA might have lied to them too.
Come on now. If you accept that the Republicans on the committee were aware of and consciously allowed to continue the practice, then you have to accept that the Democrats were in the same boat.
So it’s Pelosi’s fault now that Bush authorized torture? What kind of screwed up GOP logic is that. If members of Congress told the public they would get sent to jail because they signed secrecy agreements drafted up by….you guessed it the White House, and who is in the white house.
Certainly not Pelosi.
You have to love Republicans and their alternate reality distortion machines.
“To all it may concern – war and peace is a messy, messy game. That’s why it most people really shouldn’t be made aware of what is done. It’s nasty, dirty and stuff that no one should have to do. But it has to be done.”
@ number 3, what the hell?!
Of course people should be made aware the more the better. It’s the general apathy of the population that’s driving everyone to not give a damn anymore!
Wake up!
Congressmen always get concerned about these things, after the public learns about them and asks why congressmen weren’t concerned before?
#31, Thomas,
So what are you suggesting? If I swear you to secrecy and then proceed to tell you I am committing a crime excuses that crime? These people were not allowed to say anything. They were BRIEFED !!! They were not consulted. The whole intelligence committees of both houses were kept in the dark so how could they object?
Sorry, your white washing doesn’t clear the fact that the White House authorized torture. A criminal act can not be condoned if this is to remain a country of laws.
#35
The issue is not whether the crime itself is being “excused.” It is not. The issue is whether people that now claim to be against the practice did anything to oppose it when they were informed that it was happening. Swearing to secrecy only goes so far as you are concealing activity which you think to be the right course of action. If I swear to secrecy and you proceed to tell me that you are committing a crime and I do nothing to stop you committing that crime then I cannot later claim that I was against it all along.
You are getting wrapped up in the word “briefed.” Either they were aware the practice was happening or not. Which is it? If the former, then they are as culpable as those that did it for not doing anything to stop it. If the later, then the Republicans that were on those committees are also free from blame and perhaps most in the Bush Administration since they too were only “briefed” on the practice.
#36, Thomas,
Your argument fails on two points.
The members that were briefed were briefed as part of the official secrets act. They were not allowed to say anything or tell anyone about what happened in that meeting. As there was no record of that meeting, WE DON’T KNOW WHAT WAS SAID OR OBJECTIONS WERE MADE. Even today, they are still bound by the secrecy and may be prosecuted for reporting what was said.
Once the information came to public light, then they rightly condemned the practice based upon the public information.
Second, the Republicans are in the same boat. It is not their reaction to the briefing, it is their reaction to once the information became public. If they supported torture then yes, they deserve condemnation. If they objected to torture, as John McCain did, then they deserve commendations.
There is no hypocrisy here by the Democrats. They have followed a consistent policy all along. Torture is wrong. The hypocrisy is when the White House told us that the US does not torture.
The Democrats support torture, and murder, if it does not benefit the US.
#37
No sir. This is all about standing up for what you believe even in the face of adversity. Do you believe that waterboarding is torture and a crime against humanity? If yes, then no vow of secrecy should stop you from acting to stop that crime. If the CIA had said they were conducting gruesome experimentation on live terrorists, would you still find those that were “briefed” but did nothing because of their vow of secrecy to be free from blame? Many Nazis at Nuremberg made the same claim about the holocaust. They knew it was going on but did nothing to stop it. (No post would be complete without a Hitler/Nazi reference ;->)
What people ask of their politicians (but rarely seem to get) is to be consistent. If you did not know, then say you did not know. If you did know, then do not turn around say you were against it when you could have stood up at that moment and stopped it.
#40. Mustard- “Can you imagine your indignation if Nancy Pelosi (assuming she had even been briefed, which we have no reason to suspect)”
wrong.
Pelosi: “On one occasion, in the fall of 2002, I was briefed on interrogation techniques the Administration was considering using in the future. The Administration advised that legal counsel for the both the CIA and the Department of Justice had concluded that the techniques were legal.
OK Mac, ya got me on that one.
My other points still stand.
Thomas….you can never win against Mustard when he’s on his anti-Bush, neo-con, evil Republican rants. Just make your point and move on, rational people(Mustard isn’t in that group) will look at your point and like it or not depending on their outlook.
Sadly, Mustard will never be able to end his rant’s because unless the Democrats get off their asses and do what they claimed they would do to win the 2006 congressional races, they will not win the WH next year.
I always thought I was the niaeve young idealist, but even I know that both parties have stood by and allowed Bush to do 95% of what he’s done. The Dem.’s didn’t bitch and moan(except Obama and Kucinich) until they thought they could hide their part in Iraq and torture, and they thought it was safe to attack a President at war. The Rep.’s kept their faces closed as long as they thought it kept them in office, except for Ron Paul and McCain.
As to Pelosi or any of the members of congress that were briefed speaking up or publically…..well Mustard your arguement is just plain BS……There are members of congress that have spoken up and they are still doing it….Kucinich, Paul, McCain (especially on torture, also tactics)Obama,and others to numerous to mention. None of them are in jail, not even the members of the CIA and the FBI who have been leaking war stuff since 2002. So you phoney ass excuse dosen’t wash Mustard. Pelosi, Clinton and all those other’s who are now **shocked, shocked I tell you** that we have been using waterboarding are just plain liars chickenshit’s. Include our illustrious Senate leader in that as well, Mr. Reid(we can’t win this war, it’s already lost)….haven’t heard much out of him since things got quiet in Iraq, have we Mustard? If anyone should be brought up for undermining the troop’s, he’s it. I’m against the war and I think what he did and said border’s on aiding and abbetting the enemy.
By the way how’s that withdrawal vote that Harry Reid was promising? You guys posted about it a few weeks ago, saying it just took them awhile to figure out how the government worked.
One bit of good news, Nancy Pelosi sold out her committee chairs and decided to go along with the President’s spending requests, with an overall cut in spending, according to some sort of creative accounting.
#43, Joshua,
Once again you post bullshit and expect it to stick.
There are members of congress that have spoken up and they are still doing it….Kucinich, Paul, McCain (especially on torture, also tactics)Obama,and others to [sic] numerous to mention. None of them are in jail, not even the members of the CIA and the FBI who have been leaking war stuff since 2002.
Of all the people you mention, how many have been privy to this CIA briefing?
Who in the CIA and FBI leaked the information? Well guess what, since no one knows who leaked the stuff, no one is being prosecuted. All the politicians that have objected to the policy, objected upon the information in the public realm. That is why there have been no prosecutions. Congress can’t get the information from the DOD, Justice, or the CIA about torture.
Include our illustrious Senate leader in that as well, Mr. Reid(we can’t win this war, it’s already lost)….haven’t heard much out of him since things got quiet in Iraq, have we Mustard? If anyone should be brought up for undermining the troop’s, [sic] he’s it. I’m against the war and I think what he did and said border’s [sic] on aiding and abbetting [sic] the enemy.
So what is your point? No politician is allowed to criticize? The White House can’t even tell the American people why we are still in Iraq instead of pursuing bin Laden. There is no plan today nor was there a goal yesterday.
The “war” is quiet? Geeze, this just in, A suicide bomber killed 22 on Friday in Bagdad. 41 Iraqis are dead, over 150 injured from car bombs in a southern Iraq city. American troops killed a 9 yr old boy during a raid in Sicher. Drive-by shooting in Tal Afar kills two local leaders. Gunmen kill two policemen in Mosul. Mortars kill a policeman in Falluja.
FYI, there were 37 Americans killed in Iraq in November. 296 wounded in October. Did you want to tell them how well the war is going?
Phillep said, The Democrats support torture, and murder, if it does not benefit the US.
That WOULD be hypocrisy, if true. But I have no idea what you’re talking about.
When and where does our party “support” torture and murder?
But the Republicans? Man-oh-man, whole books have been written documenting their breathtaking hypocrisy.
I don’t understand the headline for the post. Waterboarding isn’t torture.
To explain it simply, just follow the posts on this blog. Many people have posted that torture never works, you can’t get usable information, etc.
Well waterboarding has yielded information about additional attacks, from Khalid Mohammed, and Zubaydah(who according to one book revealed tha names of Saudi princes, who then ended up dead). Therefore, waterboarding isn’t torture.
#47, MikeN,
Well waterboarding has yielded information about additional attacks, from Khalid Mohammed, and Zubaydah(who according to one book revealed tha [sic] names of Saudi princes, who then ended up dead). Therefore, waterboarding isn’t torture.
I am always so amazed at how ordinary civilians can get this information when Congress can’t. And this is in spite of the fact the President has publicly declared “We don’t torture people”. So someone is not being truthful.
They stopped attacks. OK, on what? The Liberty Tower in San Fransisco? Pete’s Pizza in Pasadena? Fred’s Falafel House in Frankenmuth?
#40
> people who were briefed (whose
> names themselves
> remain secret) were bound by their oath
No oath is binding when it requires someone to conceal an inhumane practice. That said, if they wanted to maintain their oath there are still actions that could have been taken to protest the practice.
> the torture had been approved at
> the highest levels of the government
If we include in “highest levels of government” those that were on those early committees, then we agree.
> maybe the CIA pulled their punches…
That is a completely different argument. You are saying here that they really did not know what was happening or were not given sufficient information about what exactly was entailed by the CIA during these briefings. However, the very first paragraph of the article states that in 2002 Pelosi was given a tour of a facility including the techniques being used. That makes the ignorance argument pretty thin.
As you mentioned, some of the politicians did protest. Jane Harman (D) claims she wrote a formal letter of protest to the CIA. Rockefeller tried to start a Congressional investigation on the matter after he found out. Frankly, anyone that did not do *something* should be condemned for being cowardly and banal and that points the finger directly at Pelosi.
#43
Yep. Apparently the Democrat’s crap does not stink.
>>No oath is binding when it requires someone
>>to conceal an inhumane practice.
Yeah, and we could sit back and watch the shit fly from the sanctity of St. Thom for those “traitors” who revealed components of our “war on terror” when the leaks showed up in the New York Times.
>>That said, if they wanted to maintain their
>>oath there are still actions that could have
>>been taken to protest the practice.
Like what? Bitch and moan at the CIA presenters? For all we know, that’s just what they did, and were told to stuff it.
>>However, the very first paragraph of the
>>article states that in 2002 Pelosi was given
>>a tour of a facility including the techniques
>>being used.
Uh, no it doesn’t state that. It states they were given a VIRTUAL tour. You know, like when you go on a Realtor®’s web site, and the camera pans around to all the good-looking parts of the house, not showing you the dry rot or the bathroom that looks like a crack house or the dead trees outside??
What they got was a sanitized, disinfected, dumbed-down explanation of what the CIA had in mind, and even THAT was enough to get some people angry enough to try an end-run around their vows of secrecy.
Keep on supporting torture, Saint.
#50
You are a serious piece of work. How can you state on the one hand that waterboarding is torture and then turn around and defend those that let it continue? That is the height of hypocracy. You should be demanding that Pelosi provide evidence that she did something to stop this form of interrogation when she had a chance. She was one of the longest running members on the intelligence committee. To claim that she did not know is cowardly, hypocritical and bullshit.
Tommy, Tommy, Tommy. If the Honorable Ms Pelosi had anything to do with waterboarding, and did not go on (secret) record as being opposed to it, then she should be subject to sanction. I hope she can “prove herself innocent”, although that’s the reverse of the American way (not that that would be a problem for Dumbya and his henchmen).
However, she’s a teensy-weensy fish in a very big pond. The barbaric nutcases who promoted, covered up, denied, and became apologists for this technique (e.g., Dumbya and his puppeteers) are the true villains here, and the ones who should be subjected to the harshed punishment.