Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Of course we all now know that the waterboarding was all the fault of Nancy Pelosi. What everyone, the right wing, the right wing media and even the SCLM completely ignore is what the CIA actually said about the "briefings".
1. When telling about what they briefed Pelosi and the other Congressional leaders on, the CIA says, "...various EIT (enhanced interrogation techniques) that were used on Abu Zubaydah but the word waterboarding was not used."
2. The letter that CIA director Panetta sent this week states; is drawn from the past files of the CIA and represents MFRs completed at the time and notes that summarized the best recollections" of individuals involved. Each letter also states that "[i]n the end, you and the Committee will have to determine whether this information is an accurate summary of what actually happened."
In other words, there is no "record" of the briefing, it's "memos of record" that "summarize" the "best recollections" of those involved. As anyone who ever saw Alberto Gonzalez testimony "recollections" from people who are on the hot plate are often, cloudy and uncertain.
Of course we all now know that the waterboarding was all the fault of Nancy Pelosi. What everyone, the right wing, the right wing media and even the SCLM completely ignore is what the CIA actually said about the "briefings".
1. When telling about what they briefed Pelosi and the other Congressional leaders on, the CIA says, "...various EIT (enhanced interrogation techniques) that were used on Abu Zubaydah but the word waterboarding was not used."
2. The letter that CIA director Panetta sent this week states; is drawn from the past files of the CIA and represents MFRs completed at the time and notes that summarized the best recollections" of individuals involved. Each letter also states that "[i]n the end, you and the Committee will have to determine whether this information is an accurate summary of what actually happened."
In other words, there is no "record" of the briefing, it's "memos of record" that "summarize" the "best recollections" of those involved. As anyone who ever saw Alberto Gonzalez testimony "recollections" from people who are on the hot plate are often, cloudy and uncertain.
golfgod
Why does pelosi need to tell 4 different stories then?
Are you taking the side of the terrorist and Nancy Pelosi?
Dick Cheney? (now that would be a lovely couple)
Quote:
It would seem that way with your obvious attempt to absolve her.
Just curious.
I find that too much attention is being put on Pelosi, while many of the facts get covered up.
What was told or what she heard or when it was, is of NO IMPORTANCE to the issue of Torture. So far more are saying it did not work, and was not being used for anything other then to get validation of our attacking Iraq. I have little faith in the 'word' of the CIA.
That being said, it is not my job or those of the other 49 states to absolve her. If she is doing her job for her state, they should re-elect her. If not, then they should elect someone else.
I find that too much attention is being put on Pelosi, while many of the facts get covered up.
What was told or what she heard or when it was, is of NO IMPORTANCE to the issue of Torture. So far more are saying it did not work, and was not being used for anything other then to get validation of our attacking Iraq. I have little faith in the 'word' of the CIA.
That being said, it is not my job or those of the other 49 states to absolve her. If she is doing her job for her state, they should re-elect her. If not, then they should elect someone else.
Nancy's folly was her attempt to lead the witch-hunt against the past administration without first calculating the political capital she would lose in the event that her name was brought into the fray. I personally think she made a freshman-type mistake with her outspokenness- or she simply thought she was above it all. She would have been better off not making any statement at all than attempting to convince everyone she had no knowledge of the situation. When it comes to politics, you give the opposition a window, they're taking a door!
None of them should be absolved. They should all come clean. It was done and people were made aware of it way back when. Admit the guilt and move on.
Agreed!!!
I find the hypocricy of liberal Democrats amusing.. For 8 years there was a call to hold the Bush Administration accountable and now that Pelosi is under question so many are defending her complacency in her knowledge of the waterboarding..
I voted for Obama (registered Declined to State) and consider myself to be moderate to slightly liberal, however, I do think that Nancy Pelosi or ANY Democrat should NOT be immune to the same type of scrutiny and criticism that the Bush Administration and the Republicans faced over the past few years.. (d) or (r) they should ALL be held accountable.. I say open up an investigation on Pelosi to see exactly WHAT she knew and what she signed off on..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
