Should Pelosi get a pass?

[Cutlass]

So the Democrats got caught in a big lie. Not exactly a shocker.

P.S. - Waterboarding isn't torture anyway. Bamboo under fingernails, that's torture. Pouring some water on someone, not torture.

By law, by treaty, by history, by usage, and by tradition, waterboarding is torture. Only by a narrow political rhetoric is it not torture.

 

[MobBoss]

I just saw a news clip of Pelosi speaking about this. She was shaking so hard she was hardly able to speak. Just listening to her talk about it - well, her body language, at least to me, screamed 'LIAR'.

In essence, she is accusing the CIA of deliberately misleading the American people. The CIA apparently has dossiers that show Pelosi was briefed.

Who should we believe? After hearing Pelosi speak on it and taking in her body language and speech....I think I will go with the CIA.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Congress is the only one who could of done anything about it. The House is far from helpless in this matter.

O RLY? What exactly are you supposed to do if you think the US government is performing illegal covert acts which have been intentionally classified to assure the details would never be divulged to the outside? Tell the press? Face going to prison. Tell other congressmen who are not cleared to hear those details? Face going to prison. But whatever you did, it would likely be political suicide given the climate at the time.

And YES!, it is always far more important to go after the bad people in office, then the bad people out of office.

Many of those Republican "bad people" are still in office. Did you forget about them?

And I would strenuously disagree with the rest. The people who actually violated the law are obviously far more important from a criminal justice perspective than complete outsiders who were merely told about it in some manner, shape, or form to fulfil a legal requirement.

We ALL knew what was going on. Besides the bug thing, there is NOTHING new in these reports other then details. To claim the wool was pulled over your eyes is...I just don't have the words.

O RLY? Did you already forget that GWB and his cronies deliberately lied to Congress and the rest of the country to invade Iraq? And you don't think they ever did it in any other circumstances such as this?

And I don't know about you, but I certainly don't know how much Pelosi knew or didn't know. I am speculating based on few or no concrete facts. How about you?

In essence, she is accusing the CIA of deliberately misleading the American people. The CIA apparently has dossiers that show Pelosi was briefed.

No, they have 'dossiers' that her aide was briefed. And didn't the CIA engage in "deliberately misleading the American people" in regard to Iraq?

Who should we believe? After hearing Pelosi speak on it and taking in her body language and speech....I think I will go with the CIA.

Ah. The voice of completely unbiased reason. You had no idea how you felt about this topic until you saw her speak, probably on Fox "News".

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

So the Democrats got caught in a big lie. Not exactly a shocker.

P.S. - Waterboarding isn't torture anyway. Bamboo under fingernails, that's torture. Pouring some water on someone, not torture.

Its not "pouring water on someone," its "shoving it down their throat and stopping just before they die from drowning."

FYI, we tried many Japanese for torture for waterboarding Americans in WWII.

 

[MobBoss]

No, Cheesy, it is indeed poured over the head, over the plastic/cloth covering their face.

In this procedure, the individual is bound securely to an inclined bench, which is approximately four feet by seven feet. The individual's feet are generally elevated. A cloth is placed over the forehead and eyes. Water is then applied to the cloth in a controlled manner. As this is done, the cloth is lowered until it covers both the nose and mouth. Once the cloth is saturated and completely covers the mouth and nose, air flow is slightly restricted for 20 to 40 seconds due to the presence of the cloth… During those 20 to 40 seconds, water is continuously applied from a height of twelve to twenty-four inches. After this period, the cloth is lifted, and the individual is allowed to breathe unimpeded for three or four full breaths… The procedure may then be repeated. The water is usually applied from a canteen cup or small watering can with a spout… You have… informed us that it is likely that this procedure would not last more than twenty minutes in any one application." [21]

And as an fyi, the techniques used today are not the same as how the Japanese did it.

During World War II both Japanese troops, especially the Kempeitai, and the officers of the Gestapo,[66] the German secret police, used waterboarding as a method of torture.[67] During the Japanese occupation of Singapore the Double Tenth Incident occurred. This included waterboarding, by the method of binding or holding down the victim on his back, placing a cloth over his mouth and nose, and pouring water onto the cloth. In this version, interrogation continued during the torture, with the interrogators beating the victim if he did not reply and the victim swallowing water if he opened his mouth to answer or breathe. When the victim could ingest no more water, the interrogators would beat or jump on his distended stomach.[68][69][70]

Are you able to see the differences there?

Often, this makes the entire difference in what can be said to be torture...and what isnt.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

No, Cheesy, it is indeed poured over the head, over the plastic/cloth covering their face.

Source citation is often a great way to improve one's argument.

At any rate, it doesn't change the fact that we have tried people for performing this act as torturers in the not-too-distant past. Nor does it change the fact that it is, in fact, torture.

 

[MobBoss]

Source citation is often a great way to improve one's argument.

Its from the wiki which got it from the United States's Office of Legal Counsel stated the CIA's definition of waterboarding in a Top Secret 2002 memorandum.

At any rate, it doesn't change the fact that we have tried people for performing this act as torturers in the not-too-distant past. Nor does it change the fact that it is, in fact, torture.

Again, the technique wasnt exactly the same. The Japanese did a whole lot more than simply what we apparently employed.

I had a long talk with one of my JAGs yesterday about this very topic of torture. He has been very vocal against torture and spent a good deal of time working at the Pentagon during the last 5 years. And yet, he himself admitted that often its not sufficient to simply label an act as 'torture' and that you need to examine the process or technique applied. These goes for all interrogation techniques. Sleep deprivation is normally not considered 'torture', but it absolutely can be torture if taken to an extreme.

Its also not honest to describe what we did in waterboarding as the same as what the Japanese did by simply labeling it 'waterboarding'. The techniques were wildly different, and in that difference, could absolutely lie the difference of what is considered torture and what is an enhanced interrogation technique.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Often, this makes the entire difference in what can be said to be torture...and what isnt.

Um, no it can't. Both are forms of torture, and both were used by the Bush administration and various foreign countries against suspected 'terrorists', many of whom were completely innocent of any wrongdoing.

Sleep deprivation is normally not considered 'torture', but it absolutely can be torture if taken to an extreme..

Which apparently was done on a regular basis to every 'detainee' in custody.

And what did your esteemed collegue have to say about prolonged periods of sensory deprivation? That too is a form of torture which was also done to every one of them for extended periods.

Its also not honest to describe what we did in waterboarding as the same as what the Japanese did by simply labeling it 'waterboarding'. The techniques were wildly different, and in that difference, could absolutely lie the difference of what is considered torture and what is an enhanced interrogation technique.

Only to someone who is trying to condone obvious acts of torture. The effects are exactly the same.

 

[MobBoss]

Um, no it can't. Both are forms of torture, and both were used by the Bush administration and various foreign countries against suspected 'terrorists', many of whom were completely innocent of any wrongdoing.

Of course it can. You simply disagreeing doesnt indicate otherwise.

Again, unless you are willing to devalue interrogation techniques to the level of using a rolled up newspaper, such things as sleep deprivation, isolation, temperature control, use of dogs, are not torture per se....but absolutely have the ability to be so if used in an excessive or abusive nature.

 

[MobBoss]

Which apparently was done on a regular basis to every 'detainee' in custody.

Duh. Sleep deprivation doesnt exactly work if its not done on a regular basis. Dont assume regular basis = excessive. Its not.

Only to someone who is trying to condone obvious acts of torture.

Or to someone who doesnt want to be intellectually honest about the differences.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

How do you draw the line? Any attempt to do so is going to most certainly be grounded in semantics. Since we can't draw that line, we shouldn't do any of it.

 

[MobBoss]

How do you draw the line? Any attempt to do so is going to most certainly be grounded in semantics. Since we can't draw that line, we shouldn't do any of it.

So we should let innocent people die because we arent willing to draw that line?

Interesting.

Maybe we should only fight wars with 1 arm tied behind our back just to make it fair too.

You see, I think the Bush admin did draw that line in order to save american lives. I think those techniques did indeed result in viable intelligence/information that lead to the defeat of subsequent terror attacks planned on the USA after 9/11. If democrats say Pelosi deserves a pass because that was simply the climate after 9/11, then such a pass should be extended to both sides of the aisle...not just one.

That line being hard to draw will also be the reason it will never be pursued any further by the Obama admin. In order to prosecute it, that line would have to absolutely be drawn hard.....and thats going to affect everyone equally - including democrats. I dont think anyone is currently willing to do that in the current admin.

 

[JollyRoger]

Maybe we should only fight wars with 1 arm tied behind our back just to make it fair too.

Like 150,000 troops instead of the 500,000 recommended by the Generals?

 

[MobBoss]

Like 150,000 troops instead of the 500,000 recommended by the Generals?

Do you think that made it fair?

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

So we should let innocent people die because we arent willing to draw that line?

Interesting.

You are only responsible for your own actions, not the actions of others. If you torture someone, it doesn't matter what becomes of it, you've still committed a grave wrong and personal violation of another person.

 

[GoodGame]

Honestly, is there a single Congress member that anyone can look up to, from either party?

Not too many war-heroes in office that I'm aware of.

There are a few congress members that I smirk at though (last name Frank).

 

[Formaldehyde]

Again, unless you are willing to devalue interrogation techniques to the level of using a rolled up newspaper,.

Which is clearly illegal according the Geneva Convention, US law, and international law.

such things as sleep deprivation, isolation, temperature control, use of dogs, are not torture per se....but absolutely have the ability to be so if used in an excessive or abusive nature.

Which they clearly were "excessive or abusive" in all cases. And which are also illegal in any manner, shape or form, according to the Geneva Convention, US law, and international law.

Let's face it. Just like GWB and the other neocons, you are trying to rationalize clearly illegal acts of torture and other abuses. And this is exactly why they should be prosecuted and sent to prison. A clear message must be sent so it never happens again.

 

[MobBoss]

Ah. The voice of completely unbiased reason. You had no idea how you felt about this topic until you saw her speak, probably on Fox "News".

No, it was on CNN. Dont be a jerk. It was covered by a wide range of news outlets.

 

[MobBoss]

Which is clearly illegal according the Geneva Convention.

Only if I hit him with it. Maybe you made a false assumption there eh?

Let's face it. Just like GWB and the other neocons, you are trying to rationalize clearly illegal acts of torture and other abuses.

Pelosi and the other democrats that apparently knew about this are neocons now?

Interesting.

 

[Formaldehyde]

No, it was on CNN. Dont be a jerk. It was covered by a wide range of news outlets.

And you still claim you hadn't made up your mind until you saw the video? And I'm the "jerk"?

Here's the video, BTW. Unfortunately, it hasn't been chopped up into Fox News sound bites so people will have to see the entire briefing in context.

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/05/...er-torture-as-cheneys-memo-request-is-denied/

I don't see anything so terrible about it.

Only if I hit him with it. Maybe you made a false assumption there eh?

Right... Then what did you mean?

Pelosi and the other democrats that apparently knew about this are neocons now?

Interesting.