Nancy Pelosi and Top Members of Congress Were Aware of Waterboarding in 2002

Epicurus

Reasonable
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/08/AR2007120801664.html?hpid=topnews

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.

The briefer was specifically asked if the methods were tough enough," said a U.S. official who witnessed the exchange.

Congressional leaders from both parties would later seize on waterboarding as a symbol of the worst excesses of the Bush administration's counterterrorism effort.

With one known exception, no formal objections were raised by the lawmakers briefed about the harsh methods during the two years in which waterboarding was employed, from 2002 to 2003, said Democrats and Republicans with direct knowledge of the matter. The lawmakers who held oversight roles during the period included Pelosi and Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.) and Sens. Bob Graham (D-Fla.) and John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), as well as Rep. Porter J. Goss (R-Fla.) and Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan).

Only after information about the practice began to leak in news accounts in 2005 -- by which time the CIA had already abandoned waterboarding -- did doubts about its legality among individual lawmakers evolve into more widespread dissent. The opposition reached a boiling point this past October, when Democratic lawmakers condemned the practice during Michael B. Mukasey's confirmation hearings for attorney general.

GOP lawmakers and Bush administration officials have previously said members of Congress were well informed and were supportive of the CIA's use of harsh interrogation techniques. But the details of who in Congress knew what, and when, about waterboarding -- a form of simulated drowning that is the most extreme and widely condemned interrogation technique -- have not previously been disclosed.

U.S. law requires the CIA to inform Congress of covert activities and allows the briefings to be limited in certain highly sensitive cases to a "Gang of Eight," including the four top congressional leaders of both parties as well as the four senior intelligence committee members. In this case, most briefings about detainee programs were limited to the "Gang of Four," the top Republican and Democrat on the two committees. A few staff members were permitted to attend some of the briefings.
 
I guess now we know why "Impeachment is off the table".

This was one of the outright illegal acts, no question, that this adminstration committed, and that made it impeachable.
 
You may be right Di . Its now basically an election year and the Rs will get buzy getting REAL dirty like always.
 
Maybe we heard no official objection because the briefing was TOP SECRET and to have done so would have been to breach top secret infomation. Once it was leaked to the public... one would no longer be protecting top secret info. Had she said something back in the day, the CONS would be screaming treasom!
 
Maybe we heard no official objection because the briefing was TOP SECRET and to have done so would have been to breach top secret infomation. Once it was leaked to the public... one would no longer be protecting top secret info. Had she said something back in the day, the CONS would be screaming treasom!

I understand it was top secret, and I understand in the aftermath of 9/11 people were freaked out and less willing to challenge any government effort to thwart another attack.

Common sense however, should have informed those who were stout of heart to ask why the fuck torture was needed to get information.
 
Maybe we heard no official objection because the briefing was TOP SECRET and to have done so would have been to breach top secret infomation. Once it was leaked to the public... one would no longer be protecting top secret info. Had she said something back in the day, the CONS would be screaming treasom!



Fair enough but:

1) The Speech and Debate clause would prevent any prosecution of a member of Congress for leaking classified information;

2) Most of them didn't even attempt to make a secret condemnation of the program (with the possible exception of Harman); and

3) The Cons scream treason anyway, why should that matter?


This is just more evidence that most Democrats are spineless pansies that are too afraid to look "soft" to do what's right.
 
Fair enough but:

1) The Speech and Debate clause would prevent any prosecution of a member of Congress for leaking classified information;

2) Most of them didn't even attempt to make a secret condemnation of the program (with the possible exception of Harman); and

3) The Cons scream treason anyway, why should that matter?


This is just more evidence that most Democrats are spineless pansies that are too afraid to look "soft" to do what's right.

Agreed. This story has just slammed me. I might not vote at this point. I'm just disgusted.
 
Maybe we heard no official objection because the briefing was TOP SECRET and to have done so would have been to breach top secret infomation. Once it was leaked to the public... one would no longer be protecting top secret info. Had she said something back in the day, the CONS would be screaming treasom!
Official objections can be raised in a Top Secret setting. Usually are if there is ever a chance that such meetings might be declassified. While the objection could not be made public until the declassification, it would be on record when the meeting was declassified.
 
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/08/AR2007120801664.html?hpid=topnews

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.

The briefer was specifically asked if the methods were tough enough," said a U.S. official who witnessed the exchange.

Congressional leaders from both parties would later seize on waterboarding as a symbol of the worst excesses of the Bush administration's counterterrorism effort.

With one known exception, no formal objections were raised by the lawmakers briefed about the harsh methods during the two years in which waterboarding was employed, from 2002 to 2003, said Democrats and Republicans with direct knowledge of the matter. The lawmakers who held oversight roles during the period included Pelosi and Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.) and Sens. Bob Graham (D-Fla.) and John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), as well as Rep. Porter J. Goss (R-Fla.) and Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan).

Only after information about the practice began to leak in news accounts in 2005 -- by which time the CIA had already abandoned waterboarding -- did doubts about its legality among individual lawmakers evolve into more widespread dissent. The opposition reached a boiling point this past October, when Democratic lawmakers condemned the practice during Michael B. Mukasey's confirmation hearings for attorney general.

GOP lawmakers and Bush administration officials have previously said members of Congress were well informed and were supportive of the CIA's use of harsh interrogation techniques. But the details of who in Congress knew what, and when, about waterboarding -- a form of simulated drowning that is the most extreme and widely condemned interrogation technique -- have not previously been disclosed.

U.S. law requires the CIA to inform Congress of covert activities and allows the briefings to be limited in certain highly sensitive cases to a "Gang of Eight," including the four top congressional leaders of both parties as well as the four senior intelligence committee members. In this case, most briefings about detainee programs were limited to the "Gang of Four," the top Republican and Democrat on the two committees. A few staff members were permitted to attend some of the briefings.

Thanks Beefy...

Glad your actually doing something...JPP Staff...

CK
 
Lol. If it were a Republican scandal, then this would be about 40 pages long about "Those damn Republicans!", but because it is a Democrat scandal the only thing Desh can say is "Election year propaganda" (well, she wishes she could spell that well).

You people amuse me to no end.
 
I think maybe we should guestion who the people were who made these claims bofore we accept something as fact.

Im going to wait for a little more evidence before I believe something coming out without names behind the claims.
 
I think maybe we should guestion who the people were who made these claims bofore we accept something as fact.

Im going to wait for a little more evidence before I believe something coming out without names behind the claims.

Again, the hypocrisy...you wouldn't be waiting for facts if this were about Bush personally waterboarding or some absurd shit like that....

Party hack.
 
You may be right Di . Its now basically an election year and the Rs will get buzy getting REAL dirty like always.

I think maybe we should guestion who the people were who made these claims bofore we accept something as fact.

Im going to wait for a little more evidence before I believe something coming out without names behind the claims.

Wow, you're really married to the Democrats. But guess what? They're little monsters as well, they just confirmed Mukasey to prove it.

They're complicit every step of the way. At BEST, they are enablers to a bigger monster, at worst, they're part of the same monster.

What would it take for you to see that the Democrats are not all wonderful angels fighting for justice and the American citizen? They're interested in the same thing the Republicans are interested in - Power. They could give a fuck about you.
 
I'm not trying to moralize here.

The article speaks for itself. I just think it's useful information that any true defender of civil liberties should be aware of before they unknowingly cast a vote for torture in 2008.
 
Back
Top