Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Pelosi: Utterly Contemptible -Krauthammer


  • Please log in to reply
82 replies to this topic

#1 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,298 posts

Posted 01 May 2009 - 09:19 AM

http://www.realclear...cept_96283.html

-snip

WASHINGTON -- Torture is an impermissible evil. Except under two circumstances. The first is the ticking time bomb. An innocent's life is at stake. The bad guy you have captured possesses information that could save this life. He refuses to divulge. In such a case, the choice is easy. Even John McCain, the most admirable and estimable torture opponent, says openly that in such circumstances, "You do what you have to do." And then take the responsibility.

Some people, however, believe you never torture. Ever. They are akin to conscientious objectors who will never fight in any war under any circumstances, and for whom we correctly show respect by exempting from war duty. But we would never make one of them Centcom commander. Private principles are fine, but you don't entrust such a person with the military decisions upon which hinges the safety of the nation. It is similarly imprudent to have a person who would abjure torture in all circumstances making national security decisions upon which depends the protection of 300 million countrymen.

The second exception to the no-torture rule is the extraction of information from a high-value enemy in possession of high-value information likely to save lives. This case lacks the black-and-white clarity of the ticking time bomb scenario. We know less about the length of the fuse or the nature of the next attack. But we do know the danger is great. We know we must act but have no idea where or how -- and we can't know that until we have information. Catch-22.


...

Judging by Nancy Pelosi and other members of Congress who were informed at the time, the answer seems to be yes. In December 2007, after a Washington Post report that she had knowledge of these procedures and did not object, she admitted that she'd been "briefed on interrogation techniques the administration was considering using in the future."

Today Pelosi protests "we were not -- I repeat -- were not told that waterboarding or any other of these other enhanced interrogation methods were used." She imagines that this distinction between past and present, Clintonian in its parsing, is exonerating.

On the contrary. It is self-indicting. If you are told about torture that has already occurred, you might justify silence on the grounds that what's done is done and you are simply being used in a post-facto exercise to cover the CIA's rear end. The time to protest torture, if you really are as outraged as you now pretend to be, is when the CIA tells you what it is planning to do "in the future."

But Pelosi did nothing. No protest. No move to cut off funding. No letter to the president or the CIA chief or anyone else saying "Don't do it."

On the contrary, notes Porter Goss, then chairman of the House intelligence committee: The members briefed on these techniques did not just refrain from objecting, "on a bipartisan basis, we asked if the CIA needed more support from Congress to carry out its mission against al-Qaeda."

More support, mind you. Which makes the current spectacle of self-righteous condemnation not just cowardly but hollow. It is one thing to have disagreed at the time and said so. It is utterly contemptible, however, to have been silent then and to rise now "on a bright, sunny, safe day in April 2009" (the words are Blair's) to excoriate those who kept us safe these harrowing last eight years.


Last time Pelosi was on with Jon Stewart...it was a Obama lovefest and push for her new book. Yet...she's never really hammered on this...is she.

#2 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,926 posts

Posted 01 May 2009 - 09:35 AM

She's a liberal from San Fransisco, get over yourself

#3 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,298 posts

Posted 01 May 2009 - 09:36 AM

Dems put her in line after Biden to take over the presidency...that doesn't concern you that she's a lying b***h?

#4 cookinwithgas

cookinwithgas

    Grey Poupon Elitest Trash

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,926 posts

Posted 01 May 2009 - 09:39 AM

No, she's a politician. Anyone you have voted for has "lied" just as much. And I never even voted for her.

Anyways I'd rather have her third in line than Cheney 8th in line. When he lies, Americans die.


http://amfix.blogs.c...hraib-soldiers/

#5 Matt Foley

Matt Foley

    Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,983 posts

Posted 01 May 2009 - 09:41 AM

Dems put her in line after Biden to take over the presidency...that doesn't concern you that she's a lying b***h?


That only matters if the "she" is a conservative.

#6 Fiz

Fiz

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,863 posts

Posted 01 May 2009 - 09:41 AM

[QUOTE=g5jamz;2024754Last time Pelosi was on with Jon Stewart...it was a Obama lovefest and push for her new book. Yet...she's never really hammered on this...is she.[/QUOTE]

you're complaining about the level of interview on a satirical news show that airs on comedy central after South Park

think about that

#7 Matt Foley

Matt Foley

    Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,983 posts

Posted 01 May 2009 - 09:42 AM

No, she's a politician. Anyone you have voted for has "lied" just as much. And I never even voted for her.

Anyways I'd rather have her third in line than Cheney 8th in line. When he lies, Americans die.


http://amfix.blogs.c...hraib-soldiers/


I'd rather have you in line than Pelosi.

#8 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,298 posts

Posted 01 May 2009 - 09:49 AM

And up go the walls between departments again...when the CIA feels like it's losing support from Congress what do you think happens?

There have been quite a few closed door meetings in the past week(s) with no republicans present, but Leon Panetta in on and letters written reassuring CIA officials. Here...read up on it...

http://www.humaneven...le.php?id=31689

After which THIS letter was issued out to the CIA...

http://www.humaneven...A Workforce.pdf

a suckup letter?...lol...people are smarter than that

#9 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,298 posts

Posted 01 May 2009 - 09:50 AM

you're complaining about the level of interview on a satirical news show that airs on comedy central after South Park

think about that


Wait...we were told weeks ago that Jon Stewart was doing the work real journalists weren't doing during the bailout fiasco/CNBC/etc. Now he's a stooge?

Make up ya'lls minds liberals...

#10 Fiz

Fiz

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,863 posts

Posted 01 May 2009 - 09:56 AM

Wait...we were told weeks ago that Jon Stewart was doing the work real journalists weren't doing during the bailout fiasco/CNBC/etc. Now he's a stooge?

Make up ya'lls minds liberals...


who told you that?

and every politician that goes on the daily show gets a softball interview. get off the cross

#11 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,298 posts

Posted 01 May 2009 - 09:57 AM

who told you that?

and every politician that goes on the daily show gets a softball interview. get off the cross


LOL...you are truly an Obama-bowler.

#12 Delhommey

Delhommey

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 12,510 posts

Posted 01 May 2009 - 09:59 AM

Paleo conservatives and their "smoking gun/mushroom cloud/ticking time bomb" arguments amuse me.

#13 g5jamz

g5jamz

    Is back

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,298 posts

Posted 01 May 2009 - 10:02 AM

At least there aren't memos coming out about how to politicize national security interests...right Mr. Rockefeller?

You all want the walls back up between departments...Pelosi and the gang are here to show you how.

#14 Matt Foley

Matt Foley

    Member

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,983 posts

Posted 01 May 2009 - 10:03 AM

According to Stewart, Harry S. Truman is guilty of war crimes. We should have set the first A Bomb 15 miles off the coast to warn them before actually dropping one on them and killing 100,000 people.

Nevermind that Japan only surrendered after the second bomb.

#15 Fiz

Fiz

    SENIOR HUDDLER

  • HUDDLER
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,863 posts

Posted 01 May 2009 - 10:18 AM

Japan's surrender had very little to do with annihilating two of their last three cities with bombs they didn't understand and much more to do with the red army having just wiped out their remaining troops in manchuria and coming in to throw a rape party

nuking japan had very little to do with insuring victory (as evidenced by our near eradication of the rest of the country using traditional methods) and much more to do with showing the Russians what we could do.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Contact Us: info@carolinahuddle.com - IP Content Design by Joshua Tree / TitansReport.