Where fools rush in.. (Dem's & hearings)

[Tchocky]

That's hilariously and depressingly partisan of you, SteamWake. Would you support such hearings if there was no involvement on the Democratic side?

Torture is wrong whether Nancy Pelosi knows about it or not.

[SteamWake]

Im not going to get into the "I like torture" debate. Whom in their right mind would state "Im for torture !" for crying out loud.

This thread is about the hyprocisy and flat out bull **** that is being doled out.

Pelosi launches a pre-emptive strike

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22401.html

[August]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

That's hilariously and depressingly partisan of you, SteamWake. Would you support such hearings if there was no involvement on the Democratic side?

Torture is wrong whether Nancy Pelosi knows about it or not.

He is no more partisan than you have been over the past year and you aren't even from here.

[Tchocky]

I think being in favour of torture hearing just to embarrass a particular party goes a long way past my own bias.

[SteamWake]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

I think being in favour of torture hearing just to embarrass a particular party goes a long way past my own bias.

No the point is not to 'embarress' them but to have their deceptive ways revealed to the general public for all to see. Enough of the 'Do as I say not as I do'.

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

That's hilariously and depressingly partisan of you, SteamWake. Would you support such hearings if there was no involvement on the Democratic side?

Torture is wrong whether Nancy Pelosi knows about it or not.

Yes but this makes Pelosi just as suspect. Should have raised the flag then, not now.

[Tchocky]

Just as suspect?

As the guys that ordered that people were to be tortured?

Waiting until your party has executive and legislative power mightn't be the most morally pure way to go about rectifying the cruel mess that was American Torture 2001-8, but it's not the same as ordering the cruelty in the first place.

[SteamWake]

"Did Torture save lives?"

http://www.nationaljournal.com/njmag...90425_8738.php

[mookiemookie]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

"Did Torture save lives?"

http://www.nationaljournal.com/njmag...90425_8738.php

The CIA says "no":

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...print/asection

[AVGWarhawk]

I think the question here mookie is why was this not questioned years ago. Not whether it worked or not. Torture is torture no matter how you look at it and no matter what information is obtained, if any at all.

[Max2147]

The Dems should have stood up and protested against torture as soon as it became public. Several Dems did so as individuals, but they should have done so as a party.

That said, I'm gald to see them making up for their mistakes.

[SteamWake]

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

The CIA says "no":

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...print/asection

Two weeks ago, Bush's vice president, Richard B. Cheney, renewed that assertion in an interview with CNN, saying that "the enhanced interrogation program" stopped "a great many" terrorist attacks on the level of Sept. 11.

"I've seen a report that was written, based upon the intelligence that we collected then, that itemizes the specific attacks that were stopped by virtue of what we learned through those programs," Cheney asserted, adding that the report is "still classified," and, "I can't give you the details of it without violating classification."

Since 2006, Senate intelligence committee members have pressed the CIA, in classified briefings, to provide examples of specific leads that were obtained from Abu Zubaida through the use of waterboarding and other methods, according to officials familiar with the requests.
The agency provided none, the officials said.

That article in the ... ahem... Washington Post seems to focus on one individual.

But Cheny stating that lives were saved will obviously be dissmissed as a lie becaus well its Cheny saying it.

[Aramike]

Originally Posted by mookiemookie

The CIA says "no":

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...print/asection

That depends on who you ask: http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/po...wonders_e.html

Here's a blog discussing your article: http://patterico.com/2009/04/26/wate...-tower-attack/

The bottom line is that I really don't give a damn about the comfort of those who support the actions of suicide bombers in a civilian shopping district. Waterboarding is not injuring the detainees ... it is merely causing physical and mental distress.

Oh well.

[Fr8monkey]

My question is during the debates Sen. McCain stated he believes in Water boarding and stated himself that it saves lives; but as a POW in Vietnam HE was water boarded and said he would say anything to get it to stop. Hypocracy, indeed?

[AVGWarhawk]

Originally Posted by Tchocky

Just as suspect?

As the guys that ordered that people were to be tortured?

Waiting until your party has executive and legislative power mightn't be the most morally pure way to go about rectifying the cruel mess that was American Torture 2001-8, but it's not the same as ordering the cruelty in the first place.

The Pelosi camp’s version of events is intended to answer two key questions posed by her critics: When, precisely, did she first learn about waterboarding? And why didn’t she do more to stop it?

I never said it is any better or worse than those that ordered the torture to begin with. My point is she is just as suspect and a conspirator in this matter because she had knowledge that this was going to happen. She sat on her thumbs. The premise here is not who is right or wrong, the premise is this should not have happened. Plenty were aware of it and of those who were aware had power to do something about it. Nothing was done. Pelosi is more powerful than the President IMO and no flags were raised then.