Punish those who knew about torture
Finally, something I can agree with along with the folks at Kos and HuffPo and Raw Story and all the rest of the dens of BDS sufferers. Let’s punish those folks who gave approval for the supposed and so-called torture techniques that the CIA used. Here’s some of the people I want imprisoned (Washington Times link);
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV of West Virginia and Rep. Jane Harman of California, all Democrats.
According to the Washington Times’ Kara Rowland, the three above were among the legislators who knew about the “torture” (I used quotation marks, because apparently what everyone else is calling torture is really just surprisingly mild discomfort) and gave at least tacit approval for the techniques.
The CIA briefed top Democrats and Republicans on the congressional intelligence committees on enhanced interrogation techniques more than 30 times, according to intelligence sources, who said those members tacitly approved the techniques which some Democrats in Congress now say should land Bush administration officials in prison.
Between 2002 and 2006, the top Republicans and Democrats on the House and Senate intelligence committees “each got complete, benchmark briefings on the program,” said one of the intelligence sources who is familiar with the briefings.
Yeah, so instead of just pursuing Bush folks who are trying to stay employed in the private sector, let’s go after some of these congressmen and Senators who have nothing to do but answer stupid pointless questions all day.
Category: Politics
Alright…help me out, here. Last night, I got into a huge discussion about this at a local establishment with a hard-core Obama supporter. He says that torture is illegal in the US and the UN (hahaha!) has jurisdiction over anyone committing it because of the Geneva Conventions.
(I know, here we go, again.)
Now, please correct me if I am misinformed. The Geneva Conventions (1949) only applies to those who have signed and particpated. This would NOT include Iraq or Afghanistan, therefore what is written in said conventions does not hold any water.
Since I believe waterboarding is not torture, nor are underwear on heads, leashes on necks (etc). I say it’s more of a humiliation factor.
My beef is that if The COW is gonna go after anyone, then he must go after himself and anyone else who voted for the use of force, since there was never an “official” (gag me) declaration of War. I don’t care who the hell they think they’re fooling but even now, They are all complicit.
“I don’t care who the hell they think they’re fooling but even now, They are all complicit”. Exactly, defend, and that’s the money quote. If someone knows of a “crime” and does nothing, they aid and abet that crime. (Quotes for “crime” because, as you I don’t equate fraternity pranks to crime).
So, every congresscritter who knew of this needs to be stood up in the docket along with those the O and Holder are after.
Actually, following the time line, it’s clear that George Soros is the power behind the throne. MoveOn starts running ads about this, and petitions online, and the O clicks his heels and starts talking prosecutions, but dumps it all in Holder’s lap.
Following this logic, can we start the prosecutions for those idealogues in the Clinton administration who allowed 9-11 to happen? Jamie Gorelick, George Tenant and how about we go back to the Carter years, and try Jimmuh Catah and Stansfield Turner for allowing the Iranian mess to happen?
Ok…let’s get a show of hands…how many think that any investigation of supposed “torture” will end up naming a single member of Congress, especially any that have the letter “D” behind their name…
*chirp-chirp*
Claymore, that’s all I hear too. But, the four previous directors of the CIA and Admiral Blair have given anyone who may end up in court a great start on a defense. After all, if it was against the law, why did none of the lawyers in congress say so? Why did none of the members of the Intelligence and Judiciary committees say, “hey, this is wrong and you better not do it”?
Private admission, public denial. To appease his fans, Obama tries to put horns and a tail on the Bush administration’s successful counter-terrorism programs.
Obama won’t prosecute anyone, because he can’t.
Aside from the fact that several members of the Democratic Party knew about the interrogation methods,
Obama knows that if he allows prosecution he will have to release the classified information gleaned from the interrogations, which will prove they were sucessful. Instead, he’ll try to politicize the intelligence because the truth would be inconvenient. The whole attempt to blame Bush and denounce what turned out to be productive interrogations, will blow up in his face.