Pelosi's in some deep doo doo

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Since, (as with Libby) somebody has to pay to make the nuts "feel good".

For possibly the 4th time today . . . prosecute them all.

and for the 4th reply

FOR WHAT? For something YOU disagree with?

What law has been broken?

Torture . . . it's what we've been talking about all freekin' day long.

No, we have been talking about water boarding. Big difference

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[futuredivot 0]

Quote

Torture . . . it's what we've been talking about all freekin' day long.

I thought you guys started talking about Pelosi getting caught in a lie-it only became about torture when you started the standard "But you guys did worse stuff" defense that seems to be the prime response when a socialist gets less than stellar press.

You are only as strong as the prey you devour

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

Torture . . . it's what we've been talking about all freekin' day long.

I thought you guys started talking about Pelosi getting caught in a lie-it only became about torture when you started the standard "But you guys did worse stuff" defense that seems to be the prime response when a socialist gets less than stellar press.

What I dont get is just because Obama says he will not allow the use of water boarding (which is what he says. I will wait and see what he DOES given his short track record) it is now illegal. Well good for him

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[DougH 270]

Perjury is still a crime in this country right?

"The restraining order says you're only allowed to touch me in freefall"
=P

[quade 3]

Quote

Perjury is still a crime in this country right?

Yes, it's a fairly specific one. Unfortunately, you have to be under oath for it to count. This is why, for instance, Libby goes to jail while Rove and Cheney roam free.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[MikeForsythe 0]

Quote

Torture . . . it's what we've been talking about all freekin' day long. For possibly the 4th time today . . . prosecute them all.

Then kiss the present and next administration goodbye too.

I can't believe how naive so many people are. Torture (aka interrogation) has been used by just about every country for all of time back to the Romans. It is one of those things that we don't talk or want to know about but are necessary to keep a country safe. Are you really going to try and blow smoke up everyone’s ass to think that other interrogation techniques (torture) like sleep deprivation, 24 hour a day light and noise aren't still being used?............Please. The reason that interrogation (torture) is globally used is because it works and has saved countless lives.

Think about all the hostage news stories that we see on TV where the police cut the electric and heat. They point bright lights at the building and play loud music 24/7. Do we stop that torture too?

So my question is do we eliminate ALL interrogation including sleep deprivation? The sad thing is that when YOUR family gets killed you will probably be the first to jump up and want the heads of those who did not save them.

Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is!

[MikeForsythe 0]

Quote

Yes, it's a fairly specific one. Unfortunately, you have to be under oath for it to count. This is why, for instance, Libby goes to jail while Rove and Cheney roam free.

And Clinton didn't............yeah, that analogy works..NOT

Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is!

[quade 3]

"The Line" can be drawn at the Geneva Convention. Since we're a signatory to it, it's pretty simply. In fact, it's actually spelled out as to what is and what isn't torture.

Guess what? Water boarding is torture.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

Perjury is still a crime in this country right?

Yes, it's a fairly specific one. Unfortunately, you have to be under oath for it to count. This is why, for instance, Libby goes to jail while Rove and Cheney roam free.

Libby goes for an investigative trick used months after the prosecutor learned that no crime had been committed. Political gotcha, nothing more.

And again you want jail time for someone you don’t like. NO crime committed, YOU just don’t agree with them.

Really nice Paul, real nice

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[MikeForsythe 0]

Quote

Guess what? Water boarding is torture.

News flash........I didn't say it wasn't. Now try and answer the questions that I asked!

Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is!

[quade 3]

Quote

So my question is do we eliminate ALL interrogation including sleep deprivation?

Eliminate TORTURE.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Convention_Against_Torture#Definition_of_torture

Interrogation does not equal torture, however you MUST eliminate any torture aspects of interrogation.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[MikeForsythe 0]

Quote

however you MUST eliminate any torture aspects of interrogation

Only for prisoners of war. The Geneva Convention does not apply to terrorist or domestic.

Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is!

[MikeForsythe 0]

Now let’s get back on the subject of Pelosi. She has now accused the CIA of lying to congress. This is a crime if true so she either needs to present all the evidence of this crime to the Justice Department.

Now for the real test. If the Justice Department finds that there is evidence that the CIA did commit a crime then prosecute them. If however the Justice Department finds no such evidence and that Pelosi just lied to cover her ass then she needs to resign or be removed from office.

Sounds fair to me, are you willing to go with that?

Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is!

[quade 3]

Quote

Now let’s get back on the subject of Pelosi. She has now accused the CIA of lying to congress. This is a crime if true so she either needs to present all the evidence of this crime to the Justice Department.

Now for the real test. If the Justice Department finds that there is evidence that the CIA did commit a crime then prosecute them. If however the Justice Department finds no such evidence and that Pelosi just lied to cover her ass then she needs to resign or be removed from office.

Sounds fair to me, are you willing to go with that?

For the 5th time today (maybe more I'm losing count) prosecute them ALL.

DRAG every single person involved with torturing, from the guy that signed the papers, to the people that lied about it, to the ones that tried to cover it up . . . drag them all into court and prosecute them to the fullest extent the law will allow.

On the other hand, if you don't think waterboarding is torture . . . where do you get off even thinking Pelosi has done anything wrong?

That's what I don't understand about some people here; in particular Cheney. How is it even conceivable that he attacks her on the issue without him admitting he's a WAR CRIMINAL.

Yeah, give Pelosi 5 years in federal prison for lying or whatever. I don't give a fuck. Go for it.

But Cheney and Bush are, well, going to have to hang aren't they?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[funjumper101 15]

Quote

Quote

Quote

FOR WHAT?????

Something YOU "believe" is a crime?

Rush, I have an offer I'd like to make to you.

Let me waterboard you. If during it I can get you to say it's torture, then it's torture.

If you puss out, you lose and have to shut the fuck up.

So, what about it, gonna puss out?

Wow, you really are getting desperate

why should I take a bet like this? For two reasons I ask this.

1st water boarding is not a pleasant thing. It has a purpose and reason. To make a bet about it is not one of them

2nd the simple fact you have resorted to this shows you have lost already and

I will not "shut the fuck up"

In other words, you puss out.
Sean (Chickenshit) Hannitty, the second.

It isn't torture, so you say.
In spite of all evidence to the contrary. It the idiots who feed you information told you the sky was green, you would say that too, even though anyone can see that it isn't.
PARROT MODE ON!!!

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

FOR WHAT?????

Something YOU "believe" is a crime?

Rush, I have an offer I'd like to make to you.

Let me waterboard you. If during it I can get you to say it's torture, then it's torture.

If you puss out, you lose and have to shut the fuck up.

So, what about it, gonna puss out?

Wow, you really are getting desperate

why should I take a bet like this? For two reasons I ask this.

1st water boarding is not a pleasant thing. It has a purpose and reason. To make a bet about it is not one of them

2nd the simple fact you have resorted to this shows you have lost already and

I will not "shut the fuck up"

In other words, you puss out.
Sean (Chickenshit) Hannitty, the second.

It isn't torture, so you say.
In spite of all evidence to the contrary. It the idiots who feed you information told you the sky was green, you would say that too, even though anyone can see that it isn't.
PARROT MODE ON!!!

the idiots that feed me info?

Oh the tolerance of the left

and you say I have my parrot mode on!

You are one funny person

You made my day

Thanks!

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Pelosi is not the prime mover in this.

No. She is not. I never said she is. Neither is the mother who didn't secure the liquor. One way or another, the kid is the prime mover in that action and is the one who is most culpable and the one who should face the strictest penalty.

Congress is to provide oversight. Congress is to pass laws. When lawyers parse words (Paul - how many times have I mentioned my disgust at the Bush Administration for its "defense lawyer" antics?) of laws, Congress - and Congress alone - changes the law to reflect exactly what is supposed to happen.

Quote

How anybody can even begin to criticize Pelosi without bringing up Bush and Cheney on war crimes charges is incomprehensible.

Paul - my sights are not set squarely on Pelosi. Or McCain. Or even Bush and Cheney. My sights are on all of them.

Bush, Cheney, Gonzales, Ashcroft, Tenet. They are the prime movers. This is not an "all or nothing" thing, Paul. I criticize the aforementioned harshly. I also criticize Pelosi. I didn't criticize Pelosi previously because, well, Pelosi never denied it.

Until last month: Said Pelosi at a press conference on April 22:

Quote

what I have tried to do when I became -- in the light of these things is to say that it's the responsibility of the executive branch, which controls all of that, to inform the committee, the Intelligence Committee, because the Intelligence Committee has to vote on these issues, has to make important decisions about them, and they don't even know it's happening. And you can't tell them. And I have always been truly faithful to never disclosing, because that is what the law is, what happens in those briefings.

"And so, you know -- flat out -- they never briefed us that this was happening. In fact, they said they would if and when they did?

...

Q: "It does pretty specifically talk about the fact that Abu Zubaydah, they started using these tactics, including water boarding in 2002 and continued doing it in 2003 and 2004."

Pelosi: "I was not briefed on that."

Q: "And in the fall, 2002, after the use of interrogation techniques on Abu Zubaydah, CIA records indicate that the CIA briefed the chairman and vice chairman of the Committee on Intelligence."

Pelosi: "They didn't tell us that. They may have briefed us on something, but they did not brief us to that effect. They can say whatever they want, but the fact is they did not brief us in that regard.

...

Q: "At the time when you did receive these legal opinions, as you put them, did you raise any objections, legal, moral or otherwise?"

Pelosi: "That's not the point, Mike. The point is they come in to inform you of what they are doing. What my point was, are they doing this? No, they're not doing it. And then to leave there to see what recourse we had, which was none."

Q: "But certainly you had the right and even responsibility to."

Pelosi: "You would have to -- you would have -- same thing with wiretapping. This is what they're doing. That's all they do. They don't come in to consult. They come in to notify. They come in to notify. And you can't -- you can't change what they are doing unless you can act as a committee or as a class. You can't change what they are doing."

(I highlighted where she said that Congress had authority to change it)

So she went from "I know nothing" to "we were told it was being discussed" to "I couldn't do anything about it/Congress has to approve it" to a senior staffer being briefed in early 03 that it WAS being used. But, as I showed in the first quote, she has "always been faithful to never disclosing."

Sure, maybe she could have had no effect. Maybe saying something about it wouldn't have done any good. I know that the Bush Admin had a tendency to squelch out any criticism - they were deaf to it.

But now Pelosi is speaking up. She is speaking up NOW when it is popular and easy. Add to that, she's also calling for a "Truth Commission."

Paul - why is bringing up Bush and Cheney on war crimes charges a condition precedent to criticism of anyone else? Pelosi has taken a public position of criticizing that which she failed to criticize privately when it was most important and most unpopular to do so.

She lied about being told to cover her ass. That is worthy of criticism.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[quade 3]

Quote

In other words, you puss out.
Sean (Chickenshit) Hannitty, the second.

It isn't torture, so you say.
In spite of all evidence to the contrary. It the idiots who feed you information told you the sky was green, you would say that too, even though anyone can see that it isn't.
PARROT MODE ON!!!

http://shakespeare.thefreelibrary.com/Taming-of-the-Shrew/5-5

Unfortunately, some are untamable.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[MikeForsythe 0]

Quote

On the other hand, if you don't think waterboarding is torture . . . where do you get off even thinking Pelosi has done anything wrong?

You really need to read what people write. For the second or third time (who knows) I NEVER said waterboarding is not torture. I don't know if Pelosi has done anything wrong. What I do know is that she has made criminal accusations against people at the CIA. If there is no proof and she lied to cover her ass then yes, she has done something wrong, do you not agree?

Quote

But Cheney and Bush are, well, going to have to hang aren't they?

I don't know and neither do you. That is up to the Justice Department to pursue. Do you think that they should be denied the right to due process? My position is give all the evidence to the Justice Department and let the chips fall where they may.

I do have a question for you though. The terrorist at the heart of the discussion is Abu Zubaydah. Since he is not a High Contracting Party to the Geneva Convention relative to the treatment of prisoners of war he has no standing or protection under the Geneva Convention, so what is the war crime?

Also, since it is clear that there is no WMD or terrorist in Iraq, why are we still there? The Democrats have been in charge of congress going on three years and yet we are still there. I thought Obama was going to pull them out as soon as he got in, what happened? I am willing to guess that the view is different from the outside until you get in and really find out what is going on.

Time and pressure will always show you who a person really is!

[quade 3]

Quote

I do have a question for you though. The terrorist at the heart of the discussion is Abu Zubaydah. Since he is not a High Contracting Party to the Geneva Convention relative to the treatment of prisoners of war he has no standing or protection under the Geneva Convention, so what is the war crime?

Because we are a signatory to a treaty that says you can't do it to ANYBODY.
http://www.hrweb.org/legal/cat.html

If you'd like a good timeline of events to try to figure out all the "who knew what whens" of this, I came across a nice one.

http://vyan.blogspot.com/2009/04/criminal-torture-conspiracy.html

Quote

Also, since it is clear that there is no WMD or terrorist in Iraq, why are we still there? The Democrats have been in charge of congress going on three years and yet we are still there. I thought Obama was going to pull them out as soon as he got in, what happened? I am willing to guess that the view is different from the outside until you get in and really find out what is going on.

Did you ever see the movie "Back Draft"? Great movie. Fire investigators try to track down an arsonist. Turns out the arsonist works for the fire department.

What you're asking is a bit like asking, "Why isn't the fire out yet?"

Well, let's see . . . up until January 20th of this year, the guys that started the fires were still lighting more fires.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

why is bringing up Bush and Cheney on war crimes charges a condition precedent to criticism of anyone else?

because...... well, just because

they don't really care about anyone else, so you can't have an independent discussion about any other individual without Bush and Cheney being inserted - even thought they have their own threads on the same subject already - simply because no one on the left is 'really' guilty of anything without excuses that eventually lead to the other team

oh - then Clinton got a BJ (just a reminder that a couple years ago, the exact same stuff was happening, just the teams were reversed).


I can just imagine the stuff that John Adam's acolytes were saying in defense of his actions - "Well, George Washington did it first, we are just cleaning up his mess"

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[quade 3]

Quote

Paul - why is bringing up Bush and Cheney on war crimes charges a condition precedent to criticism of anyone else?

Probably for the same reason it's nearly impossible to talk about Kennedy Assassination and the possibility of others being involved in a conspiracy without mentioning Oswald.

If you take Pelosi's knowledge of torture completely out of context, it doesn't make sense. For anyone to criticize her about knowing about torture, you have to establish it was torture. If you admit it's torture, then you really have to pursue the bigger question about Bush and Cheney involvement in a war crime.

It's pretty f'in' simple logic.

You can't have an accomplice to a crime without a crime being committed in the first place. If the crime is committed, the bigger issue isn't the accomplice, but the criminals involved.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[lawrocket 3]

>>> For anyone to criticize her about knowledge of torture you have to establish it's torture.

Okay. But MY issue with her is her denial of knowledge. She knew it. She didn't waterboard anyone. nobody accuses her of such. But when she claims she wasn't told, well, why is she making that claim? She was told. She lied, is assume, because shed take a hit of some sort if people thought she knew.

>>>If you admit it's torture then you have to go after Bush and Cheney.

Yes. But to the exclusion of all else? How about the actual interrogators? How about Rumsfeld? How about OLC?

Or is it ONLY Bush/Cheney?

Failure analysis does not look at only one thing, Paul. You know that. I prefer to assign blame - even percentages of it, wherever it is due.

Re: accomplice

If a crime is committes, a pretty big issue is the accomplice. So Joe robs a bank. John I'd the getaway driver and lookout.

So we should not criticize the person who is the accomplice? Bullshit.

Let's say the accomplice denies all involvement and it turns out that he was involved. "Okay. Yes, I drove the getaway car. I just let him do it. I wasn't gonna talk him out of it. So I just went along with it."

"Q: why didn't you say anything before?"
"A: because I wasn't appropriately informed of what he was doing. All I did was drive a car and watch for cops. I've maintained throughout the confidences."

No. We criticze the accomplice. In fact, under most laws, accomplices face the same punishment as the primary actor. For good reason.

Again, this would be a non-issue if she hadn't said that she wasn't told and if she hadn't been calling for a "truth commission."

She knew.
She lied about knowing.

Thus, she is fair game for criticismam

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[quade 3]

Quote

Yes. But to the exclusion of all else? How about the actual interrogators? How about Rumsfeld? How about OLC?

Or is it ONLY Bush/Cheney?

I NEVER said that. For the 6th (or thereabouts) time today . . . prosecute them ALL.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Paul - why is bringing up Bush and Cheney on war crimes charges a condition precedent to criticism of anyone else?

Probably for the same reason it's nearly impossible to talk about Kennedy Assassination and the possibility of others being involved in a conspiracy without mentioning Oswald.

If you take Pelosi's knowledge of torture completely out of context, it doesn't make sense. For anyone to criticize her about knowing about torture, you have to establish it was torture. If you admit it's torture, then you really have to pursue the bigger question about Bush and Cheney involvement in a war crime.

It's pretty f'in' simple logic.

You can't have an accomplice to a crime without a crime being committed in the first place. If the crime is committed, the bigger issue isn't the accomplice, but the criminals involved.

If Libby can go to prison for lying about someone else's 'crime', then so can Pelosi.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706