Drudge Retort: Red Meat for Yellow Dogs
Thursday, April 23, 2009

Condoleezza Rice verbally approved the CIA's request to subject alleged al-Qaida terrorist Abu Zubaydah to waterboarding in July 2002. A narrative released Wednesday by the Senate Intelligence Committee provides the most detailed timeline yet for how the CIA's harsh interrogation program was conceived and approved at the highest levels in the Bush White House. The new timeline shows that Rice played a greater role than she admitted last fall in written testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee.

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Subscriptions

Author Info

Phoenix

MORE STORIES

Special Features

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in the discussion of this weblog entry should note the site's moderation policy.

Why are Arabs so scared of getting a splash of water on their face? Does it remind them of taking a bath?

First female war criminal.

The barriers just keep on fallin.

No more glass ceiling.

Equal.

You've come a long way baby.

First female war criminal.

When and what was she convicted of?

Why are Arabs so scared of getting a splash of water on their face? -- #1 | Posted by vernon

Must be U.S. cultural imperialism. If only we hadn't made such a big deal about it in the Tokyo War Crimes Trials after WWII. www.washingtonpost.com

Madeline Albright was America's first female war criminal

When and what was she convicted of?

When and what War Crimes was Adolph Hitler convicted of?

Was Adolph Hitler a War Criminal?

Just because there is no conviction doesn't mean there was no crime.

Neo-Condi hasn't been convicted of War Crimes for the same reason Donald Rumsfeld, George W Bush, Dick Cheney, Alberto Gonzales, John Yu et al haven't been.

Cheney has covered all their asses in triplicate copies of retroactive immunity and top secret barriers.

NeoCondi, at the end of the day, was a corporate yes-woman, a Big Oil shill who ran interference for the BushCo regime while stifling any chance of diplomacy as SoS.

Planned incompetance replete with semi-plausible deniability.

Be Well.

In this country, people are not criminals until they are convicted of a crime. I'm using that well accepted judicial concept when challenging OWS's allegation.

Madeline Albright murdered civilians to further the Zionist Agenda. She is a puppet of Israel

Last fall, Rice acknowledged to the Senate Armed Services Committee only that she had attended meetings where the CIA interrogation request was discussed and asked for the attorney general to conduct a legal review. She said she did not recall details.

I'm sure I'd remember reversing decades-old policies prohibiting torture. Kind of puts misplacing keys in perspective.

Timbci proved himself a dipshit to further the head-up-the-ass agenda. He is a puppet of the GOP.

"The new timeline shows that Rice played a greater role than she admitted last fall in written testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee."

Written testimony? Under oath?

"But even the new timeline has yet to resolve the central question of who inside the Bush administration first broached the idea of using waterboarding and other brutal tactics against terror detainees in the months after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the U.S."

When it drops, it'll be a big shoe. Be interesting to see just how well Bush/Cheney insulated themselves on this. (Note Rice's OK to wateboard Zubaydah was, according to the article, verbally conveyed.)

Gotta go? gotta go.


Why are Arabs so scared of getting a splash of water on their face? Does it remind them of taking a bath?

#1 | POSTED BY VERNON AT 2009-04-23 12:19 AM | REPLY | FLAG: RACIST MORON

They are apologists for barbaric behavious Zap. You should know that by now.

Larry

Thinking about JeffJ why haven't we heard from Him in all of this?? Why haven't we heard from many of the Bushites on this?? Seems they would jump to defend their manboy?? I think the stench is too great even for them.

Larry

Come on JeffJ what say You??? Come on Bushites defend Your pondscum!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I'd be more than happy to address this, Larry. However, I am going to bed in a few minutes - I work nights.

Larry -- you write about 20 posts a day on the subject of Bush and his administration being charged with war crimes. Yet you haven't written a single letter to your congressmen -- the people who can make it happen. Why not? It seems to me you aren't all that serious about it and that you just like whining.


I'd be more than happy to address this, Larry. However, I am going to bed in a few minutes - I work nights.

Posted by JeffJ at 2009-04-23 09:21 AM | Reply


You've had ample time to address this JeffJ. Just goes to what I always thought. You're a Bush Apologist through and through. No getting around that now.

Larry

you just like whining

Actually his preference is squealing like a pig.

Here's reality, Larry.

Here's the bottom-line on all of this:


The CIA is in shambles and has been almost since its inception. A successful intelligence agency is a complete anathema to a transparent democracy - success requires secrecy and being above the law, to a considerable extent.


That is what I find so frustrating about liberals when it comes to the issue of national security. You want your cake and want to be able to eat it to. Liberals want a secure nation. They want a nation where threats against it are identified and neutralized. However, they DON'T want ANY messiness when it comes to doing what is necessary in order to accomplish the goal of a secure nation.


A. You want security? Well, in order to achieve that with a high likelihood of success, things are going to be occasionally messy.


B. You want global respect - you want ALL people to be subject to our constitutional protections - you want anyone apprehended, no matter how dangerous and vital a source of information to be treated with kid-gloves? Well, in achieving these ends you increase the likelihood that our nation will be hit again.


You can't have it both ways. We are dealing with tradeoffs here. I don't have much of a problem with liberals tending toward B. IF they acknowledge the tradeoffs associated with it AND assume some degree of responsiblity if our getting hit again can be attributed to the pussified approach toward dealing with real and genuine threats to our country.


Posted by JeffJ at 2009-04-23 09:34 AM

No JeffJ You don't get off that fucking easy. What do You support do You support Dubya's torture or do You not. Easy questioon don't want to answer that's fine thats all I need to know about where You stand with regards to what an American is supposed to be. DO YOU SUPPORT DUBYA"S TORTURE?????

Larry


Larry -- you write about 20 posts a day on the subject of Bush and his administration being charged with war crimes. Yet you haven't written a single letter to your congressmen -- the people who can make it happen. Why not? It seems to me you aren't all that serious about it and that you just like whining.

#18 | Posted by goatman at 2009-04-23 09:22 AM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

Hey You useless trool and stalker. I did write My COngressman for the run up to the Iraq War. It did no good then why would I think it would do any good today??

Larry

DO YOU SUPPORT DUBYA"S TORTURE?????


If you can find a way to re-phrase that as an open-ended question, I will gladly answer.

If you can find a way to re-phrase that as an open-ended question, I will gladly answer.


Posted by JeffJ at 2009-04-23 09:47 AM | Reply


No fucking way JeffJ. Take a fucking sand You Bushite. Do You support Dubya's Torture Yes or NO period. I should take the hint that since You want to have the question open ended You do support DUbya's torture and thaty You do not support AMerican values the same values that every AMerican should support. ANswer THE FUCDKING QUESTION JEFFJ!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Are You chicken????

Larry

I did write My COngressman for the run up to the Iraq War

???

You don't even know how many you have. How could you have written them?

It did no good then why would I think it would do any good today??

With that attitude, I guess you don't vote on election day, either.

STAND^

Kiss off trool and stalker Goatman. Why not go to another blog and ruin it too. Do You ruin everything You touch Goatman??

Larry

Kiss off trool and stalker Goatman.

Ouch. Larry got stung.

Why don't you address my truthful statement. It is indeed true you do not know how many congressmen you have representing you in DC. You have admitted it several times. That being the case, how could you have written them?

Calling me names doesn't change the facts, Larry.

Calm down, Larry.


Ansering 'Yes' or 'No' questions very often give a distorted image of ones views and opinions.

If you want to TRULY know how I feel about this, then an open-ended question is the only way to achieve your desire.

If you are attempting to add fuel to an intensely burning fire of prejudice against those with whom you disagree, then a yes-or-no question is the way to go.

Embrace the nuance and shades-of-gray, Larry. Things are not always as black-and-white as you wish them to be.

Thats all I need to know JeffJ Thanks for answering the question without answering the question. You DO Support Dubya's torture and that You do not support American Values. Thanks My Friend.

Larry

You DO Support Dubya's torture and that You do not support American Values.

I have taken no such position, Larry.


If you need to believe that for some reason, you are certainly free to assign such a position; but you do so falsely.

I have taken no such position, Larry.


If you need to believe that for some reason, you are certainly free to assign such a position; but you do so falsely.

Posted by JeffJ at 2009-04-23 10:03 AM | Reply


Sure You have. It's a black and white question. Do You support Dubya's torture. By You wanting to have the question open ended means You support Dubya's torture. If You didn't support DUbya's torture You would have said no. Thats all I need to know.

Larry

It's a black and white question.


Therein lies the problem. It's not a black-and-white issue. You may believe it is, but it isn't.


Let me ask you this, Larry.....


Let's play the hypothetical game...you catch wind that a couple of thugs are planning to abduct your beloved Aunt who used to cook for Mao, taking her to an agreed-upon location (you don't know where the location is because it's referred to as 'the rendezvous point'), raping her to a point where her anus and vagina are one big hole and then killing her in a torturous fasion.

You get a beat on one of the 2, manage to bring him under your control (subdued - tied up with nobody around except for you and him) and, knowing that time is absolutely critical, aren't in a position to simply turn this guy in; if you have any hope of sparing your aunt her horrific fate.

Basically, the only person capable of preventing this is you and you alone. What do you do? To what lengths do you go to extract the 'rendezvous point' so that you can get there in time to save your aunt?

Larry?

He went to a job interview.

Now GO TO SLEEP! LOL!

Now GO TO SLEEP!


I should have done so 2 hours ago!

I will gladly take your advice.


Keep in touch with yourself!


First female war criminal.


When and what was she convicted of?

#3 | Posted by goatman at 2009-04-23


OH goatman...you naive thing you

DONT YOU KNOW what she was convicted of

not just being a republican
but a republican membet of the bush white house
and a FEMALE AT THAT.....and not a liberal women

come on MAN

she will have to type with only one hand........


waiting for come back from that straight line..........................
..............................
....(cue the jeopardy theme.........................
..............................
...................

Let's play the hypothetical game...you catch wind that a couple of thugs are planning to abduct your beloved Aunt who used to cook for Mao, taking her to an agreed-upon location (you don't know where the location is because it's referred to as 'the rendezvous point'), raping her to a point where her anus and vagina are one big hole and then killing her in a torturous fasion.


You get a beat on one of the 2, manage to bring him under your control (subdued - tied up with nobody around except for you and him) and, knowing that time is absolutely critical, aren't in a position to simply turn this guy in; if you have any hope of sparing your aunt her horrific fate.


Basically, the only person capable of preventing this is you and you alone. What do you do? To what lengths do you go to extract the 'rendezvous point' so that you can get there in time to save your aunt?


#34 | Posted by JeffJ at 2009-04-23 10:14 AM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

Trying to use emotional questions to something that should not must not invoke such as regards to Our Principles as Americans just goes to show Me what kind of people Many of todays Americans we have become. You already answered My question with Your unwillingness to answer it. Thanks for that JeffJ.

Larry

hnn.us

Eisenhower changed the status of POWs during WWII.

"There were three main categories under which a "Nazi POW" held by American forces in WW II could fall: (1) a National Socialist Party or German-American Bund member, who was perhaps a suspected Nazi-sympathizer already living in the United States, captured by the F.B.I. shortly after the attack on Pearl Harbor, (2) a captured Nazi soldier who was sent to one of the Prisoner of War camps inside the United States, or (3) a Nazi soldier who was captured and held inside Europe after Germany was occupied by the Allies."

"The most persuasive argument for treating the German prisoners in conformity with international rules was pragmatic: if the Allies did not torture their German or Japanese prisoners, perhaps the Japanese and Germans would return the favor."

"Any ill treatment of Axis POWs might result in reprisals against American POWs. "

"This reclassification of POWs allowed the defeated Nazi soldiers to be used for labor. "

" Now that the war in Europe was over, the Allies had little incentive to treat the Germans well. The Allies no longer had to fear how the Germans were treating their POWs. "

"In 1944, American psychologists who studied newly captured POWs for Supreme Headquarters, Allied Expeditionary Forces, argued that the POWs required "a really traumatic experience...to dispel the resistance to reality." Consequently, Allies planned rough handling of POWs to emphasize the war's outcome: there was no myth of an undefeated German army after World War Two as after World War One."

Whether or not such a "traumatic experience" translated to purposefully torturous interrogations, or simply rough treatment in general, Rettig never says. Meanwhile, in the camps across Europe, Ambrose admits:

There was widespread mistreatment of German prisoners in the spring and summer of 1945. Men were beaten, denied water, forced to live in open camps without shelter, given inadequate food rations and inadequate medical care. Their mail was withheld. In some cases prisoners made a "soup" of water and grass in order to deal with their hunger. Men did die needlessly and inexcusably. This must be confronted, and it is to Mr. Bacque's credit that he forces us to do so."



American History. We can change it, but sometimes current events change the change. Despite's everyone's desire for the US to look nice, there are ugly elements that will cause Americans to be ugly.

The idea that we should prosecute anyone who responds in kind to torture should consider what we were up against.

If you just found a camp of tortured American soldiers, would you as a American soldier finding this, start thinking about the trial for the enemy or revenge.

No one should be tortured. The military should be disbanded because anyone left alive after a war that is suffering is deliberately torture.

Missing limbs, deteriorated health, mental state ruined, loss of future income and life: all of this is torture- - ask any American Soldier who is living with this.

It's not a black-and-white issue.

There is black, and there is white. The juxtaposition of the two creates gray, but what is right or wrong can not be nuanced.

Advocates of these "techniques" can not point to one specific piece of evidence gained that proved to be significant. In fact the "information" provided under these conditions wasted the time and efforts of the FBI, CIA, and Defense elements trying to find links to terrorist activity from the "confessions" obtained.

Rationalizing sadism seems to be part of the Neo-con agenda and it fits with Bush's psychology. We keep hearing their excuse pointing out that we haven't been attacked since 9-11.

Well why would you want to cross an ocean to kill Americans when you have targets of opportunity in your backyard? Luring us into a guerrilla war and not only killing twice the number that died on 9-11, but injuring our troops with bombs that cause both physiological and psychological effects that require extensive treatment, has only allowed bin Laden and others to recruit jihadists.

Moral Authority is an absolute. Undermining it with this nonsense - wazterboarding these guys multiple times a day - was an act of perversion.

As Americans we should be outraged, and insist upon prosecution of those who ordered and approved this debacle, and sentence them to prison. That includes the lawyers, Rice, Cheney, and Bush.

Open the drapes cloaking these felons and let the sunshine in.

Ozark hit the nail on the head, we are attacked daily in Iraq and Afghanistan with much less planning and cost than it would to attack our continent.

Both sides have won.

Al Queda has won since they have achieved their goal of luring the US into an expensive and unwinnable war.

The government has won since they have pants pissers that will gladly hand over privacy and freedom for the illusion of security.

Metaphorically speaking, Condi had a nice set of male appendages. I'm not sure of appeasers like Barry and Hillary.

A while ago there was a link here that said the waterboarding and other methods lead to basically nothing. We now know that's not true, and that a major plot was disrupted and many arrests were made.

Does that really count for nothing? President Obama's own National Intel Director even said it works. National security doesn't have to be a partisan issue, as bad as Bush was, we have to admit that these techniques did in fact work.

NY Times: Banned Techniques Yielded High Value Information

"High value information came from interrogations in which those methods were used and provided a deeper understanding of the al Qa'ida organization that was attacking this country," Adm. Dennis C. Blair, the intelligence director, wrote in a memo to his staff last Thursday.

There's not really much left to say after reading that.

Senate Armed Services Committee Inquiry Into The Treatment Of Detainees In US Custody

Executive Summary

Mr. Fredman, chief counsel to the CIA's Counter Terrorist Center, said simply "It is basically subject to perception. If the detainee dies you're doing it wrong." -- Page xvii.

So what? So did Nancy Pelosi!

What was this high value information? Oh yeah it's a secret.By the way what is this deeper understanding of AQ? Are they SMERSH, KAOS or just some nuts swinging on monkey bars. The day before 911 Bush knew nothing about them;the day after he was an expert.These spies should do what they are supposed to do, i.e. put on disguises, go undercover, and look through keyholes. Instead they ask leading questions of a guy who has been awake for 8 days.Send Condi undercover. She speaks fluent Russian. She could pose as a refugee from Chechnya.

Gee, trigger the war crimes hysteria. But don't forget to add all of congress to that list, including Pelosi and Kennedy, since they were all briefed on the techniques to be used on just three known terrorists who where known to be withholding crucial information. Information which when retrieved only by this extreme coercion saved the USA from at least one major terrorist attack.

So if those are the action of war criminals, here's hoping for more of them. Unfortunately, the country probably won't pay for the danger that Obama has put us in until he's out of office, just as Bush paid for 9/11 mainly through Clinton's neglect of the issue.

Hot, Black, and Kinky!

Spank me Condi, Spank me!


GRRRRRR!

Apparently Jeffi J gets off on abusive black women too!

Hey Jeffi, you do realize that she is an actual woman?

Sorry to burst the bubble.

Rabbit-toothed
Icey
Cunt...pure
Evil with a piano

Oh wait. I forgot.

Gigitty!

This not to excuse her or any other Democrat who colluded with the abuse of our country's laws but Nancy Pelosi wasn't president. Neither was she in charge of the House at that time. Or any of the committees. The Republicans were and we all know how closely they followed their constitutional duty to act as a check on the executive branch. Their idea of that was "You should delete that word there and change that one over there, otherwise it's yet another shining example of your wisdom, your Excellency. Now where did I put that rubber stamp?"

Rice deserves a medal.

So what? So did Nancy Pelosi!

#48 | POSTED BY DAVETHEWAVE AT 2009-04-23 05:56 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

Pelosi didn't understand what was going on... When she figured out that there were no cameras in the room, she lost interest and tuned out. All she heard was blah...blah...blah...blah... LUNCH ...blah...blah...blah

Hot, Black, and Kinky!

Spank me Condi, Spank me!

GRRRRRR!

#51 | Posted by jerrytarkanian


You left out "...and make me write bad checks."

Medals were thrown around with complete abandon by the Glorious Leader On Whom The Sun Never Sets, especially Presidential Medals of Freedom but you had to have had your empty head far up his ass to qualify. Rice had more self-respect than Bremer, Franks and Tenet.

They are not going to after anyone except the lawyers!


That is just too funny!


Kill All the Lawyers!


First female war criminal.


When and what was she convicted of?

#3 | Posted by goatman

Don't worry Goatman, these people refuse to believe that the Dems in Congress knew about it and supported it.

in violation of laws, the u s has tortured

Advocates of these "techniques" can not point to one specific piece of evidence gained that proved to be significant. In fact the "information" provided under these conditions wasted the time and efforts of the FBI, CIA, and Defense elements trying to find links to terrorist activity from the "confessions" obtained.

We implemented techniques used by other countries to force false confessions for propaganda. The same false confessions McCain issued when he was tortured. This wasn't done for "actionable" intelligence, or to keep anyone safe. It was done to force a false connection between Iraq and Al Qaida. It didn't work, even after 183 times in a single month. It was done to find WMD, but there weren't any, so we tortured more.

I'd bet (rhetorically) you could lay out a timeline with the episodes of torture and correlate them with Wilson's piece in the NYT, the hunt for WMD, and Cheney's rants about Al Qaida and Iraq.

Don't worry Goatman, these people refuse to believe that the Dems in Congress knew about it and supported it.

FInd out, I don't care what party the perps belong. You won't escape one point, though, this was created, envisioned and implemented by the Bush Admin.

and maybe its time for obama's lawyers to start thinking about thier future

whether you want to believe it or not, obama wont be in there forever and neither will a democrat.
and then EVERY LITTLE THING THEY ARE DOING THERE RIGHT now will be under republican scrutiny

completely serious now though

arent lawyers there now at least thinking twice about advice they might be giving obama?

because remember if dems can come back and sue you for any thing then so can republican lawyers.

you pussies don't know what torture is!
We made 2 very bad guys uncomfortable enough to tell us their plans....grow a set or shut up

Precisely AFKABL2. I'm quite sure there are "edgy" memos in the file about how hard they can push federal powers. Heaven help them if they are wrong.

It's sooo stupid to go down this path. Every administration will turn into litigating and prosecuting the previous. In the meantime, things that are important will simply pass us by.

agreed
and when those things might be things that could lead to stopping an attack on us or not, there is a lot more at stake than just another tax hike by the dems...

"In this country, people are not criminals until they are convicted of a crime. I'm using that well accepted judicial concept when challenging OWS's allegation."

There is no such "well accepted judicial concept".

"We implemented techniques used by other countries to force false confessions for propaganda."

President Obama's National Intelligence Director disagrees with you.

We made 2 very bad guys uncomfortable enough to tell us their plans....grow a set or shut up

Wrong in so many ways. Did you read the Senate report signed, unanimously, including Werner, McCain and Lindsey?

While we're on the subject, those two you refer aren't in these photos:

my.pclink.com

my.pclink.com

my.pclink.com

static.crooksandliars.com

www.revolution-austria.at

Grow a pair yourself, call it what Boehner called it today:

Torture.

Torture is wrong on so many intellectual levels that one cannot begin to see how any myopic amoeba person can justify its use.

Shit, it is like we have not learned anything from the dark ages.

Torture just proves most of us have not become sentient beings above the animal kingdom. We are not aware.

President Obama's National Intelligence Director disagrees with you.

"The information gained from these techniques was valuable in some instances, but there is no way of knowing whether the same information could have been obtained through other means," Admiral Blair said in a written statement issued last night. "The bottom line is these techniques have hurt our image around the world, the damage they have done to our interests far outweighed whatever benefit they gave us and they are not essential to our national security."

Not that it matters. It's still torture. It's still illegal under both our laws and international law. We still prosecuted those that used these techniques for war crimes.

"Not that it matters. It's still torture. It's still illegal under both our laws and international law. We still prosecuted those that used these techniques for war crimes.

#73 | Posted by YAV"

That is all absolutely true. What is also true is that it worked. Like he says we'll never know if they would have divulged information by other means, but what we absolutely do know is that they did give up information through these means. Information that supposedly broke up a second plot and lead to many arrests.

I'm torn on this subject because torture is wrong, but in these cases it sounds like it saved many American lives at the expense of 1-3 very terrible people. I don't know... I really don't. I just know it seems to work.

I also know its true we prosecuted the Japanese for crimes such as waterboarding. But don't you think if they had defeated us in the war they probably would have held our generals and leaders accountable for questionable actions we took? Like imprisoning thousands based solely on their ethnicity?

I'm not saying they weren't wrong or we were, just that "to the victors go the spoils" and that seems to include prosecuting the losers (those that survived anyways)

That is all absolutely true. What is also true is that it worked. Like he says we'll never know if they would have divulged information by other means, but what we absolutely do know is that they did give up information through these means. Information that supposedly broke up a second plot and lead to many arrests.

And you believe this....why???

LOL! First the lie and then change the truth then say it works and you believe it......you're on worthless brain dead child aren't you.

Another WOB!

"and lead to many arrests"

Any convictions?
Just wondering, comrade.

"you're on worthless brain dead child aren't you.

Another WOB!

#76 | Posted by moneywar"

Why would I on a worthless brain dead child?

"Any convictions?
Just wondering, comrade.

#77 | Posted by Zatoichi "

I don't know. I hope they release all the memos, but the NID seemed to confirm at least to a degree what Cheney was saying (Cheney by himself wouldn't have been close to credible of course but Adm. Blair saying it worked helps a lot).

but what we absolutely do know is that they did give up information through these means. Information that supposedly broke up a second plot and lead to many arrests.

Greendad, though there is no conflict for me, I am sympathetic with your apparent conflict.

I'd like to know what was really gained. So far we don't really know. We have a statement, one that so far stands alone (except for Cheney, of course). that the same person that made it seems to dismiss.

We do know the Library Tower plot in LA has been touted as one that torture helped thwart.

Unfortunately the arrests were made in that case at least 6 months before (the acknowledged) torture on KSM was used and touted as having given us that information. Guess that one's not a good example.

Then there's this:

In an interview with Vanity Fair last year, the F.B.I. director since 2001, Robert S. Mueller III, was asked whether any attacks had been disrupted because of intelligence obtained through the coercive methods. "I don't believe that has been the case," Mr. Mueller said.

But the memorandum then lists among Abu Zubaydah's revelations the identification of Mr. Mohammed and of an alleged radiological bomb plot by Jose Padilla, the American Qaeda associate. Both those disclosures were made long before Abu Zubaydah was subjected to harsh treatment, according to multiple accounts.

www.nytimes.com

If you do read that link, you'll find a case for your argument, though the two paragraphs I chose from it help make my point.

You left out "...and make me write bad checks."

#58 | Posted by CalifChris at 2009-04-23 06:49 PM

So...I have to pay you cash next time?

Bada Bing!!

Oh, and good luck with the cognitive dissonance. There's a lot of that going on in the U.S. these days.

Why didn't Rice (or Cheney) testify on Lynndie England's behalf at her court martial?

Is Pelosi also a war criminal?

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.


Hill Briefed on Waterboarding in 2002

Hang 'em all imo.

Obama has done the worse of the wost in releasing these memos.

The enemies of the US are ROTCFALTAO

rolling on the cave floor and laughing their asses off.


But that's what leaders do in power when they are liberals (or Dems).


Now everyone wants more memos declassified.

And so it goes....

LOD--

Didn't you hear?

Pelosi denies ever knowing about the "torture" done by the CIA.

She is a flaming liar.

How is some memo written by someone who was involved with the interrogation, and themselves on the hot seat, supposed to demonstrate that we gained valuable information in the first place? Are we to believe Cheney or Rice or Bush were above writing false memos? Were they telling the truth about the reasons for war with Iraq?

If there is a terrorist on every street corner, how come the only act of terrorism in the US was 911 and that now is suspect as an inside job because there is not one shred of solid evidence that a jumbo jet hit the Pentagon, or crashed in Pennsylvania, and never before or after 911 has a building collapsed at free fall rate as a result of fire, yet three happened on that fateful day and one was never even struck by anything but falling ashes.

Did the terrorists all just quit and fly home on 9/12? Are we to believe that in less then a day our intelligence departments were so good that an entire army of terrorist cells in this country suddenly went into hiding never to be heard from again?

Now, 7 years later we are discussing whether or not torture was moral even though not one terrorist cell was ever discovered as a result? What possible valuable evidence could have been uncovered if no terrorist cells were ever found?

Apparently all they could have gotten was rumors and skewed facts that resulted in not one arrest of the terrorists that we were all told countless times (and are still being told) are lurking in the shadows.

What did they learn about the anthrax attacks? One of the most vocal opponents of the Patriot act, Tom Dashel, and the owner of a gossip rag who poked fun at Bushes daughters were targeted only to find out years later that it was an inside job too?

You people better wake up who think the past administration had no malice in mind. We are loosing our country because of your refusal to look at the facts and choose righteousness over greed.

It didn't work, even after 183 times in a single month

I seem to remember reading that he cracked the first time in under a minute.

Down in Mexico they shake up a bottle of soda and squirt it up your nose...until you zign zee papers. That's just the local cops.

That's where we were, and I hope it's over.

She is a flaming liar.

#86 | Posted by MURPHY


Well, you're a chronic liar here on Drudge, so what's your beef?


Torture is wrong on so many intellectual levels that one cannot begin to see how any myopic amoeba person can justify its use.


Shit, it is like we have not learned anything from the dark ages.


Torture just proves most of us have not become sentient beings above the animal kingdom. We are not aware.

#72 | Posted by moneywar


I feel the same way you do....


Except when millions of people are dying because a plot was not uncovered.


Believe me. I wish we lived in a world that was as safe as you want it to be as naive as you are. I would love to be naive, ignorance is bliss. But unfortunately, once you learn it, you can't unlearn it.


She is a flaming liar.


#86 | Posted by MURPHY


Well, you're a chronic liar here on Drudge, so what's your beef?

#89 | Posted by nullifidian

Wait a liar calling Murphy a liar?

Guess what. Pelosi was caught in a lie, Null.

So, go ahead and keep making a fool of yourself. It's always fun to watch.

Guess what....Pelosi was caught in a lie!

Guess what....it will not stick.

Guess what....libs run the media.

The liberal asshole will never criticize their own. They will never hold their own to the same standards as they do for anyone not a liberal.

"House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is pushing back on GOP charges that she knew about waterboarding for years and did nothing.

Pelosi says she was briefed by Bush administration officials on the legal justification for using waterboarding but that they never followed through on promises to inform her when they actually began using "enhanced" interrogation techniques"


www.politico.com


Suck on that you Tea Bagging Feltchers

Cunnilingus Rice was water boarded and said it was nothing. The gap in those front teeth made for easy breathing.

As speaker pelosi was well aware of the techniques that were to be used by CIA operatives. Unfortunately, she doesn't have the liberal balls to admit as much. This political play will blow up in the dems face as there are more layers to this thing that will be forthcoming. I can't wait to see the discovery process in action.

Good for Rice at least we had one woman in govt that was willing to step up.

Suck on that you Tea Bagging Feltchers

I don't think you get it. Pelosi's irrelevant. Linking a "he said/she said" exchange doesn't do that much. You'll need more. Until then, this is a blip in comparison to the released memos with the names and signatures.

I get it, though. Trying to bring as many people into the cesspool with you is the only tactic the GOP has available.

I don't think you get it. Pelosi's irrelevant. Linking a "he said/she said" exchange doesn't do that much. You'll need more. Until then, this is a blip in comparison to the released memos with the names and signatures.


I get it, though. Trying to bring as many people into the cesspool with you is the only tactic the GOP has available.

Posted by YAV at 2009-04-24 07:03 AM | Reply

The Right Wingers are so fucking desperate to spread their filthy hands around so they can feel less pollutted. Fucked up isn't it.

Larry

Larry,

That is SOP of the GOP. Hide then deny, then scream that they other side did it too.

rice is hot!

poor, poor terrorists and enemy combatants. They just need a hug and a pat on the back... soooo mis-understood... big bad mean U.S. bad, bad U.S.

libs love to hate themselves and their country, this torture stuff is fantastic news for them!

"Big bad mean US....."

No, just bad mean Jay. Finish stubbing out your cigarette on that chincilla.

"libs love to hate themselves and their country, this torture stuff is fantastic news for them!"

No we love America but we weren't too crazy about the country the neocons were trying to create....it certainly wasn't America.


libs love to hate themselves and their country, this torture stuff is fantastic news for them!

#101 | Posted by jaybay555 at 2009-04-24 09:12 AM | Reply | Flag: Flaming Neoclown

I don't think you get it. Pelosi's irrelevant. Linking a "he said/she said" exchange doesn't do that much. You'll need more. Until then, this is a blip in comparison to the released memos with the names and signatures.

I get it, though. Trying to bring as many people into the cesspool with you is the only tactic the GOP has available.

#96 | Posted by YAV at 2009-04-24 07:03 AM

The Right Wingers are so fucking desperate to spread their filthy hands around so they can feel less pollutted. Fucked up isn't it.

Larry

#97 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2009-04-24 07:11 AM

Translation: Pelosi is a dem, so she gets a pass.

They are apologists for barbaric behavious Zap. You should know that by now.

Larry

#14 | Posted by LarryMohr

Barbaric? Come on, Larry, our guys go thru waterboarding all the time during their training. Are you saying that out military uses barbaric training practices?

The thing that gets me is that we are still operating under the guise that this IS torture. The MSM and libs would have you believe it is, but the CIA, NSA, FBI, the US Military, and most republicans say that it isn't torture. Who has legally defined waterboarding as torture?

A leak from FOX NEWS reveals Rupert Murdock wants to torture Shepard Smith for his recent "WE DON"T FUCKING TORTURE PEOPLE IN THIS COUNTRY" comment ...but not by waterboarding. Report sayse he wants to utilize a broken off broom handle but did not exactly say or elaborate on what he proposed to do with that broom handle on poor "Shep".

Translation: Pelosi is a dem, so she gets a pass.
#105 | POSTED BY LIVE_OR_DIE AT 2009-04-24 10:40 AM | REPLY | FLAG:

Hm.

Regarding ...these people refuse to believe that the Dems in Congress knew about it and supported it. :

I said:

Find out, I don't care what party the perps belong. You won't escape one point, though, this was created, envisioned and implemented by the Bush Admin.

Post #64, this thread.

So stick to uttering your own words rather than trying to stick your words in my mouth.

The thing that gets me is that we are still operating under the guise that this IS torture.

"Last week, they released these memos outlining torture techniques. That was clearly a political decision and ignored the advice of their Director of National Intelligence and their CIA director," - House Minority Leader John Boehner, at a press conference in the Capitol.

The thing that gets me is that we are still operating under the guise that this IS torture.

#107 | Posted by everlong

According to military judges, WBing is torture. Also, we prosecuted Japanese for doing the same. Just because some retarded GOP apologists described it as splashing water in someone's face doesn't make it so. Otherwise, how would it work?

"Barbaric? Come on, Larry, our guys go thru waterboarding all the time during their training."

Yeah, I've read this talking point, do they do it 150 times to them???

If it isn't barbaric then why did we execute Japanese soldiers for it?

execute Japanese soldiers for it.

link please.

execute Japanese soldiers for it.

link please.

#113 | Posted by somoco at 2009-04-24 12:18 PM

However, the United States has a historical record of regarding waterboarding as a war crime, and has prosecuted as war criminals individuals for the use of the practice in the past. In 1947, the United States prosecuted a Japanese military officer, Yukio Asano, for carrying out various acts of torture including kicking, clubbing, burning with cigarettes and using a form of waterboarding on a U.S. civilian during World War II. Yukio Asano received a sentence of 15 years of hard labor.

en.wikipedia.org

Danni may have been exaggerating with the "execute" bit, but the point is the same.

"If it isn't barbaric then why did we execute Japanese soldiers for it?"


Dishonest at best.
However it was AMONG acts that did have men convicted
The names were Hideji Nakamura, Yukio Asano, Seitara Hata and Takeo Kita and they were sentanced to hard labor not death.

Dishonest at best.
However it was AMONG acts that did have men convicted
The names were Hideji Nakamura, Yukio Asano, Seitara Hata and Takeo Kita and they were sentanced to hard labor not death.

#115 | Posted by salamandagator

Well, perhaps an honest mistake...

AP) Republican presidential candidate John McCain reminded people Thursday that some Japanese were tried and hanged for torturing American prisoners during World War II with techniques that included waterboarding.

They also "kicked, clubbed, and burned with cigarettes."

So its a little ridiculous to claim they were "executed" for the "crime" of waterboarding.

Unless there are additional cources that say otherwise.

AP) Republican presidential candidate John McCain reminded people Thursday that some Japanese were tried and hanged for torturing American prisoners during World War II with techniques that included waterboarding.

#116 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue

A sad reminder of McCain's flip flop.

However it was AMONG acts that did have men convicted

#115 | Posted by salamandagator

That were all considered torture.

"Rice Approved Waterboarding"


So did the Dems in Congress.....


YAAAAAWWWWWWWNNNNNNN

Thanks for clarifications. I have no doubt that waterboarding is a form of torture. I just wanted to see if anyone could provide me evidence that we executed Japanese soldiers for it. Further, if we did execute Japanese soldiers, was it for waterboarding or some other crime.

I don't believe Danni's assertion, in other words.

"Further, if we did execute Japanese soldiers, was it for waterboarding or some other crime."


One thing you also have to realize is that these are among things that can be considered war crimes

"1. Participation in a common plan of conspiracy for the accomplishment of crimes against peace

2. Planning, initiating and waging wars of aggression and other crimes against peace"

WE tried and convicted (never executed) men for being on the wrong side, hell we even convicted men of war crimes for narcotics trafficking. That is apparently what the winning side can do.

some differences

from wiki

World War II

During World War II both Japanese troops, especially the Kempeitai, and the officers of the Gestapo,[64] the German secret police, used waterboarding as a method of torture.[65] 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.[66][67][68]


] Forced ingestion
Main article: Water cure

In this form of water torture, water is forced down the throat and into the stomach. This happens repeatedly until osmosis causes the cells to explode[citation needed]. It was used as a legal torture and execution method by the courts in France in the 17th and 18th century, was employed against Americans and Chinese during World War II by the Japanese, and was also used against Filipinos by American Forces during the Philippine-American War. The Human Rights Watch organization reports that in the 2000s, security forces in Uganda sometimes forced a detainee to lie face up under an open water spigot.[1]

Any reporting from the San Francisco Gate is suspect at best.

The article says "Rice personally conveyed the administration's approval for waterboarding of Zubaydah." Big difference between relaying a message of the administration's position and personally approving any actions.

Typical lib reporting. Every spec ops warrior in the U.S. arsenal is waterboarded along with every CIA covert op to illustrate the effectiveness of the technique. If it was something that would kill you or subject you to some extreme trauma then the U.S. would not subject its finest to this interrogation tactic.

Every spec ops warrior in the U.S. arsenal is waterboarded along with every CIA covert op to illustrate the effectiveness of the technique. If it was something that would kill you or subject you to some extreme trauma then the U.S. would not subject its finest to this interrogation tactic.

Posted by utastaff

What a silly statement. When you are subjected to that as a part of training you know that, no matter how bad it seems, they will stop before you die.

It most certainly WILL kill you, unless whoever is doing it stops.

"Any reporting from the San Francisco Gate is suspect at best."

Oh, and its not SF Gate reporting. Its Associated Press.

What a silly statement. When you are subjected to that as a part of training you know that, no matter how bad it seems, they will stop before you die.


It most certainly WILL kill you, unless whoever is doing it stops.

#124 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue at 2009-04-24 03:12 PM | Reply


So will Obama be releasing the long list of jihadi's that were killed as a result of over-waterboarding?
Do you know of any instances of that happening or are you making an educated guess?

Rice should be prosecuted for war crimes. I would support such proceeding, as would a great number of fair minded American patriots who are horrified at the crimes she had a hand in during the GWB years.

Do you know of any instances of that happening or are you making an educated guess?

#126 | Posted by 101Chairborne

Read again. I didn't say anyone died from it. I said you will die from it if whoever is doing it doesn't stop.

Rice should be prosecuted for war crimes

Unless you are certain your congressman blogs here, you are in the wrong forum.

Read again. I didn't say anyone died from it. I said you will die from it if whoever is doing it doesn't stop.

#128 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue at 2009-04-24 03:17 PM | Reply


I took the jist of your post to be "Trainees won't be killed because the trainer will stop before killing them". Well that goes for terrorist or trainee.
If terrorists were killed due to waterboarding we'd be reading about it or seeing pictures of it released shortly I'd assume.

Say for example none were killed while being waterboarded...How exactly is it any different than doing it to our own troops in training?

I took the jist of your post to be "Trainees won't be killed because the trainer will stop before killing them". Well that goes for terrorist or trainee.
If terrorists were killed due to waterboarding we'd be reading about it or seeing pictures of it released shortly I'd assume.

Say for example none were killed while being waterboarded...How exactly is it any different than doing it to our own troops in training?

#130 | Posted by 101Chairborne

What I meant was that training exercises differ from the real thing because in training they know it will stop before they die. In the real thing they don't know if it will or not.

I'm not claiming any did die from it. But there have been stories surfacing. As yet unconfirmed, so I don't know whether they are valid or not.

For example:

No indication what the specific cause was...

abcnews.go.com

CIA's Harsh Interrogation Techniques Described
Sources Say Agency's Tactics Lead to Questionable Confessions, Sometimes to Death
By BRIAN ROSS and RICHARD ESPOSITO
Nov. 18, 2005

Harsh interrogation techniques authorized by top officials of the CIA have led to questionable confessions and the death of a detainee since the techniques were first authorized in mid-March 2002, ABC News has been told by former and current intelligence officers and supervisors.

What I meant was that training exercises differ from the real thing because in training they know it will stop before they die. In the real thing they don't know if it will or not.


I'm not claiming any did die from it. But there have been stories surfacing. As yet unconfirmed, so I don't know whether they are valid or not.

#131 | Posted by SanAntonioRogue at 2009-04-24 03:26 PM | Reply


I was being genuine in my question (and even asked if it was just an educated guess that some had in fact been killed). I guess I misread you in a way, or more likely jumped ahead and assumed I knew where you were going.

OK, if the only difference you see is between knowing you won't be killed, and not knowing, let me ask you this...
Do you think many detainees cooperate because they fear the consequences of not cooperating (torture)? Isn't that mental torture as well?

Right now Al Quaeda and any other enemy of ours is laughing over our debates. They know how far we'll go and that we won't kill them. So, with that in mind, why not waterboard the next detainee, because like the trainee, the detainee knows he won't be killed either?

(I'm more or less trying to get you to see that "fear" is a motivator in many cooperations. Fear of torture, repurcussions, etc)

With our (the USA's) public debates on torture, the element of fear has been removed because jihadis now know the lines we won't cross.

No we love America but we weren't too crazy about the country the neocons were trying to create....it certainly wasn't America.

I know the feeling! you dems are hell bent on destroying the country and leaving your children with huge debts and no job... but hey, have at it you all have the controls, cant wait to see how well you do 4 years from now.. oh wait, it will probably still be "Bushes fault" 4 years from now...

.. oh wait, it will probably still be "Bushes fault" 4 years from now...

You can't go 10 minutes on this blog without "Raygun" being typed and he left office 21 years ago.

Do you know of any instances of that happening or are you making an educated guess?

#126 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2009-04-24 03:15 PM


Do you know it works as you say it does, or are you making an educated guess?

Rice should be prosecuted for war crimes. I would support such proceeding, as would a great number of fair minded American patriots who are horrified at the crimes she had a hand in during the GWB years.

#127 | POSTED BY MODER8 AT 2009-04-24 03:16 PM | REPLY | FLAG

And, if Pelosi and other Congressional leaders were briefed on what was intended, them too? How about the operatives that carried out the orders? How about the superiors of those operatives that carried out the orders? How about the soldiers that captured folks and turned them over knowing they were to be tortured? How about the countries that cooperated with efforts?

Do we stop at waterboarding? Does sleep deprivation, too, constitute torture and punishable as a war crime?

Obama authorized the execution of those pirates the other day, which seems to be the ultimate torture. Should he be tried, too. He knows that American bombs are killing innocent civilians, and has, in fact, ordered the escalation of hostilities in Afghanistan. What about that?

Shouldn't Truman have been tried as a war criminal for dropping nuclear weapons on Japan? That killed over 200,000 people...

And, if Pelosi and other Congressional leaders were briefed on what was intended, them too? How about the operatives that carried out the orders? How about the superiors of those operatives that carried out the orders? How about the soldiers that captured folks and turned them over knowing they were to be tortured? How about the countries that cooperated with efforts?

THe people who initiated the torture and possibly the legal team who tried to overturn well established laws against torture need to be punished.

Bush, Cheney, Gonzales and Yu need to be held accountable for their actions.

As to the rest of your mad assertions, you fergot to mention cops who shoot armed criminals.

If yer gonna make an ass of yerself you may as well go all out.

Neo-Condi was a corporate Yes-Woman in the main but if she was responsible for okaying the torture techniques used she meeds to be held accountable as well.

Be Well.

Spud, the mad assertions were my point. I see you cut off your list at Republicans only and their attorneys. What if your Democrat friends signed off on the techniques. Why draw the line where you did if they had some power to stop it?

What if your Democrat friends signed off on the techniques. Why draw the line where you did if they had some power to stop it?

Anybody on either side of the aisle who participated in making torture legal needs to swing from the highest yardarm.

Do you have cites including names and dates?

Spud'd be glad to read them.

Be Well.

So, the standard you've set for prosecution is "anybody who participated in making torture legal."

What about those who knew it was being considered and didn't do anything about it?

What is your standard for what "torture" actually is?

I guess my point is that there are an infinite amounts of gray in terms of who to prosecute and for what. There is even disagreement on what constitutes torture.

You're going to have an attorney's feast on this, all paid for by the taxpayer, and we'll be focusing on the past, which is probably what BO wants right now.

Successive administrations will now be compelled to look back to decide if what previous administrations had done was illegal. Did Obama abuse state rights or private rights and tample the constitution. Was his escalation of war proper..

You know the drill. In the zeal of trying to marginalize an entire party out of the debate, you'll wind up dividing the Country and taking the focus off of more important matters.

Who has legally defined waterboarding as torture?

#107 | Posted by everlong at 2009-04-24 11:25 AM | Reply | Flag:


I guess we (America) did when we chopped off the heads of the Japanese Military for doing it to our troops.

In this country, people are not criminals until they are convicted of a crime. I'm using that well accepted judicial concept when challenging OWS's allegation.

#7 | POSTED BY GOATMAN

So Hitler was not a criminal?

...obama wont be in there forever and neither will a democrat.
and then EVERY LITTLE THING THEY ARE DOING THERE RIGHT now will be under republican scrutiny...arent lawyers there now at least thinking twice about advice they might be giving obama? -- #65 | Posted by afkabl2

Let's hope so! That's the way legal counsel, checks and balances, oversight, etc., are supposed to work.

because remember if dems can come back and sue you for any thing then so can republican lawyers.

#65 | Posted by afkabl2 at 2009-04-23 07:44 PM | Reply | Flag:

Who's talking about 'suing' anyone?

We're talking criminal charges. There is a difference.

Comments are closed for this entry.

Drudge Retort

Home | News | Comments | User Blogs | Nooner | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | Copyright 2009 World Readable