Who's truthful here ?

CIA Intelligence officials released documents this evening saying that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) was briefed in September 2002 about the use of harsh interrogation tactics against al-Qaeda prisoners, seemingly contradicting her repeated...

statements over the past 18 months that she was never told that these techniques were actually being used - Who's truthful here, the CIA or Pelosi ?

I believe the CIA is more truthful then Pelosi since she was informed on the techniques.
She's dishonest and lied. She should resign as speaker.

magic 8 ball is coming up blank on this one...

why dont you ask all the republicans who set out the torture program in the first place (I know selective listening is your thing amblessed, or perhaps you actually support torture?)

Nancy Pelosi isn't particularily a pillar of truth...she either knew about it, or was taking cat naps during the briefings...Hell, just watch her body language when she's denying it...my bet is that she wasn't napping.

Assertive interrogation goes back a couple hundred years...it didn't just start in the last 10...

p

 
Ty, I think if it came down to a loved one being killed, like a sibling, parent or child, OR maybe a little PSYCHOLOGICAL torture to acquire the information that would prevent such event, you would opt for the psychological torture.

Water-boarding, though a physical act, is a psychological torture. It does NOT physically harm the recipient.

Be honest. When it comes down to your loved one's life or the temporary physical and psychological discomfort of a terrorist, which do YOU choose?

 
Friendship is continuous!

Those whom I meet, as Friends I greet,
And as a Friend I treat them so;
That when in need, or sadly grieved,
I may help their Spirits grow.

So when I hear, upon my ear,
The sounds of troubled Souls;
I can do no less, then to do my best,
To help them toward their goals.

And I know I'll find, with the passage of time,
That I've helped their Spirits grow some;
And though appreciated, thanks aren't awaited,
For my friends are always welcome.

I am sure that Am blessed and myself agree with these methods of torture.

Waterboarding is nothing more then a simulation. Granted if it goes on for too long then there are consequences.

If we call waterboarding torture because of the stress and fear it puts the subjects under then can we call the democrats torturist? After all they are the ones who lied on An Inconvienent Truth and scared us into going green. Which by the way is hurting our environment more then its helping. Look at the Green dishsoaps they have now, for the sake of a friendly detergant we have to wash our dishes about 3 times now. Wasting 3 sinks of water. Or the so called going green with ethanol which is now being called a disaster on both sides. The American people are being tortured by fear and stress that we are the root of all the worlds problems. At least conservatives give something real to worry about and offer a SOLUTION!

If she knew about it, she she be held accountable for lying about it. That doesn't change the fact that extremely serious laws were broken. She might have known they were being broken, but she did not order the torture. Any wrong doing on her part pales in comparison to those of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Gonzo.

But conservative will always try to deflect any warranted criticism with smoke screens like this.

But that would still make her an accomplice and guilty of purgery wouldnt it Jim?

But that would still make her an accomplice and guilty of purgery wouldnt it Jim?

As an acomplice maybe, but it would be a stretch. Unless she said it under oath, no perjury charge could be made. If she is guilty, what does that say about your hero bush? Using this type of deflection is a typical right wing tactic.

And anyone who doesn't think waterboarding is torture is incorrect. The US has actually prosecuted people in the past for using the practice.

This is the definition of torture according to United Nations Convention Against Torture:

*** Any act by which severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental, is intentionally inflicted on a person for such purposes as obtaining from him or a third person information or a confession, punishing him for an act he or a third person has committed or is suspected of having committed, or intimidating or coercing him or a third person, or for any reason based on discrimination of any kind, when such pain or suffering is inflicted by or at the instigation of or with the consent or acquiescence of a public official or other person acting in an official capacity. It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in or incidental to lawful sanctions. ***

This is the law. It was approved by congress and signed into law in 1988. As the constitution say, a treaty approved by 2/3 the senate shall be the supreme Law of the Land. Bush and cheney and rumsfeld and gonzo all violated the supreme law of the land.

Just ask yourself this question: If waterboarding was being done to a loved one would you consider it torture?

Ty, I think if it came down to a loved one being killed, like a sibling, parent or child, OR maybe a little PSYCHOLOGICAL torture to acquire the information that would prevent such event, you would opt for the psychological torture.

ethmer, PSYCHOLOGICAL torture is still torture and is still illegal.

Water-boarding, though a physical act, is a psychological torture. It does NOT physically harm the recipient.

Define no physical harm. Psycholigical torture can, and often does, lead to physiological damage. And there have been instance where water was inhaled, and lung damage occured. So please don't make this sound benign. It is far from it.

Be honest. When it comes down to your loved one's life or the temporary physical and psychological discomfort of a terrorist, which do YOU choose?

First you would have to prove to me my loved ones life is actually in danger. Then if I truly felt this person had the answers to save them, then I would volunteer to do it myself, and would risk and accept any prosecution for breaking the law. I would break the law to save my family, but I would not want the practice to become legal. Big difference.

But these doomsday scenarios are not even close to reality, and they can't be used as a basis to re-interpret standing law.

uhm they tortured one guy like a 180 times in a month... how effective is torture if you need to do it that many times? sounds like some people are sick and sadistic and take pleasure from it, more than it is an effective method. as for what is better, uhm you do know that Japanese soldiers were put to death for waterboarding US soldiers? (and they had just cause, the US nuked two if its cities). I guess the americans owe them a huge apology. So either the US is amazingly hypocritical, or it believes it is above the laws that are set out for the rest of the world (oh and it goes around enforcing those laws when everyone else is concerned).

Might be noted, CIA stated the purpose of the 2002 meeting with Pelosi was to inform certain members of Congress, with the need to know, of the interrogation techniques being used - none objected, not even the Head of that Oversight Committee....Nancy Pelosi.

Pelosi, a California Democrat, waded into that debate when she told reporters in April that in 2002 she had been briefed on the authorized techniques but was not told that waterboarding had been already been used on a prisoner. Waterboarding, which simulates drowning, is the most severe of the 10 techniques approved by the Bush White House. There is no record that Pelosi objected to using the techniques.

The CIA on Wednesday sent the House and Senate intelligence committees a chart describing the 40 congressional briefings at which the interrogation program was discussed, describing who was briefed, on what date and on what subjects.

Pelosi is only mentioned in the first briefing, on Sept. 4, 2002. The chart, drawn from the CIA briefers' memories and meeting notes, says the meeting described the interrogation techniques that had been used on alleged terrorist Abu Zubaydah.

But the CIA chart does not specifically mention the use of waterboarding at that briefing.

According to legal memos released in April, Abu Zubayda was the first of three prisoners to be waterboarded. He underwent the procedure at least 83 times in August 2002.

The first mention of waterboarding comes in the description of a February 2003 meeting attended by Pelosi's successor on the House Intelligence Committee, California Democrat Jane Harman. Harman wrote to the CIA expressing concern about the techniques, the only known objection formally raised by a member of Congress at that time.

The CIA specifically discussed waterboarding in 13 of the congressional briefings, according to the charts.

Oh, amblessed, you little liar...

the facts...
Pelosi states that she was briefed at one meeting in 2002 and waterboarding was NOT mentioned...

CIA notes state that Pelosi was at one meeting in 2002 and waterboarding was not mentioned...
In fact the CIA notes say that waterboarding was not mentioned until 2003 and that it was Pelosi's successor that attended that meeting...

Hey guys, You heard it here first...
What Would Jesus DO?

Well for those of you looking to follow the path and witness of BIG christians like amblessed and tseirpeht ... The BIG christians agree with methods of torture...so...
Wow, what would jesus do?

waterboard !!!

I guess He didn't just WALK on water...

Gee utopia, didn't mean to get your panties in a wad over the truth - just skip my entries and you won't have to whine and stamp your feet so much and you'll be able to sit much more comfortably - note, I'm not a big Christian, just strive to be one that pleases Him and I'm a person just like you with strengths and weakness but with one difference - I know in what and in whom I believe - you made your message clear: You Love Nancy Pelosi and she could never do anything wrong and all those at the CIA and their official documentation of the meeting, submitted for the record, aren't true...ok...have a great day !!

Bed 12 is ready.

I do agree that Nancy Pelosi should go. Frankly I'm embarrassed she is a Democrat let alone speaker of the house. She has been worthless ever since the Democrats took control of the house and is no doubt a big reason why congress has such a low approval rating.

Well, when trying to assess who's telling the truth and who isn't, it's helpful to figure out motives. Pelosi has an obvious motive to lie about this. It isn't clear the CIA has strong enough motives to forge documents and risk criminal fraud charges by doing so my wager goes on Pelosi as lying.

Amblessed, lol.
I don't love Pelosi. Don't like or trust her. But I also know that the CIA has been known to lie...the CIA deliberately lied, not only to the 9/11 commission, but to Congress as well.
My point is that the reports that I read, and here I must point out that I did not rely on only right wing sources, said that the CIA reports showed that she was at the first meeting in 2002, not after. And that waterboarding was not discussed at that meeting.
You and your little right wing christian cohorts seemed to be focusing on waterboarding.
I also think it is funny that you say you are a christian yet did not correct tseirpeht when he lumped you in as a supporter of torture.

Belief in Christ and support of torture...seems like a contradiction.

But then again... the hatred you spew, the lies of omission you spread...seem like a contradiction also.
You must worship some different christ. One that doesn't support all that love they neighbor stuff.

so, untwist that jockstrap...and realize that because of your lies of omission and obvious hatred of democrats...most anything you say is questionable at best.

utopia - Simple solution: If I wrote it skip it...one item I'll give you that's not'questionable at best'...Here it is: Jesus Christ loves you enough to have died on a cruel croos for you.

lol, oh amblessed, you crack me up...your questions are like honey to those of us who need a laugh.

Since you have proven, time and time again, to be a liar of omission...why would I believe ANYTHING that you say, especially what you say about christ and his love for us. You sir, are a bad witness...

You profess to be a christian...yet you do not act like a love thy neighbor, new testament kind of christian...

You are more the old testament kind of guy...

do you realize some of the things our military special forces go through? they're totured more than people captured in afghanistan or iraq ( people get beat up so bad that they break bones in training) and to pour water over someones face is more harsh? please grow up and face cold hard truth the realities and cost of safety. Not everyone plays fair and nicely in this world some people need to wake up to that

if it's just a little water, why did the international courts sentence japanese soldiers for doing it to american soldiers?

True, not everyone plays nice and fair in this world...

But guess what, as a world leader the U.S. SHOULD set an example.
Just because another country uses torture...that gives the U.S. the right to do the same?

and for those of you who voted for McCain, a man who experienced torture first hand, he does NOT believe in the U.S. using torture as a means to get information