CIA Says Pelosi Was Briefed on Use of 'Enhanced Interrogations'

SAWYER

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
16,742
42
91
Who is honestly surprised, the woman is out of control and a liar
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.

In a 10-page memo outlining an almost seven-year history of classified briefings, intelligence officials said that Pelosi and then-Rep. Porter Goss (R-Fla.) were the first two members of Congress ever briefed on the interrogation tactics. Then the ranking member and chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, respectively, Pelosi and Goss were briefed Sept. 4, 2002, one week before the first anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

The memo, issued by the Director of National Intelligence and the Central Intelligence Agency to Capitol Hill, notes the Pelosi-Goss briefing covered "EITs including the use of EITs on Abu Zubaydah." EIT is an acronym for enhanced interrogation technique. Zubaydah was one of the earliest valuable al-Qaeda members captured and the first to have the controversial tactic known as water boarding used against him.

The issue of what Pelosi knew and when she knew it has become a matter of heated debate on Capitol Hill. Republicans have accused her of knowing for many years precisely the techniques CIA agents were using in interrogations, and only protesting the tactics when they became public and liberal antiwar activists protested.

In a carefully worded statement, Pelosi's office said today that she had never been briefed about the use of waterboarding, only that it had been approved by Bush administration lawyers as a legal technique to use in interrogations.

"As this document shows, the Speaker was briefed only once, in September 2002. The briefers described these techniques, said they were legal, but said that waterboarding had not yet been used," said Brendan Daly, Pelosi's spokesman.

Pelosi's statement did not address whether she was informed that other harsh techniques were already in use during the Zubaydah interrogations.

In December 2007 the Washington Post reported that leaders of the House and Senate intelligence committees had been briefed in the fall of 2002 about waterboarding -- which simulates drowning -- and other techniques, and that no congressional leaders protested its use. At the time Pelosi said she was not told that waterboarding was being used, a position she stood by repeatedly last month when the Bush-era Justice Department legal documents justifying the interrogation tactics were released by Attorney General Eric Holder.

The new memo shows that intelligence officials were willing to share the information about waterboarding with only a sharply closed group of people. Three years after the initial Pelosi-Goss briefing, Bush officials still limited interrogation technique briefings to just the chairman and ranking member of the House and Senate intelligence committees, the so-called Gang of Four in the intelligence world.

In October 2005, CIA officials began briefing other congressional leaders with oversight of the intelligence community, including top appropriators who provided the agency its annual funding. Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a prisoner-of-war in Vietnam and an opponent of torture techniques, was also read into the program at that time even though he did not hold a special committee position overseeing the intelligence community.

A bipartisan collection of lawmakers have criticized the practice of limiting information to just the "Gang of Four", who were expressly forbidden from talking about the information from other colleagues, including fellow members of the intelligence committees. Pelosi and others are considering reforms that would assure a more open process for all committee members.


http://voices.washingtonpost.c...si_was_briefed_on.html
 

OCGuy

Lifer
Jul 12, 2000
27,224
37
91
Of course people on both sides knew what was going on. That is why there will never be real investigations.
 

SAWYER

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
16,742
42
91
Originally posted by: OCguy
Of course people on both sides knew what was going on. That is why there will never be real investigations.

That sums it up pretty much. They have to look out for each other.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
I suspect that what the CIA is saying and what they actually told Pelosi are two different things, but I do not buy the argument that if Pelosi said OK, its excuses anything. And if Pelosi is forced to resign her speaker post as a result, I for one will think its a good thing.

No one morally bankrupt enough to excuse torture should remain in leading government roles, no exceptions.

Its just another very poorly reasoned GOP argument and they as a party are as or more guilty than Pelosi for thinking its a good argument. But if the GOP wants consistency, and bouncing Pelosi is required, I say call them and raise them on their bluff.
 

Double Trouble

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,270
103
106
Originally posted by: Lemon law
I suspect that what the CIA is saying and what they actually told Pelosi are two different things, but I do not buy the argument that if Pelosi said OK, its excuses anything. And if Pelosi is forced to resign her speaker post as a result, I for one will think its a good thing.

No one morally bankrupt enough to excuse torture should remain in leading government roles, no exceptions.

Its just another very poorly reasoned GOP argument and they as a party are as or more guilty than Pelosi for thinking its a good argument. But if the GOP wants consistency, and bouncing Pelosi is req

Huh? By what leap of logic do you turn this on the GOP? The question is not if waterboarding etc was "OK" -- that's another discussion (I believe it's torture and should never have been used) -- the issue is whether Pelosi's been lying about this. She was briefed on it, as was Goss and later others. They probably had reservations but were led to believe or believed that it was needed. Now it's politically inexpedient for her to admit to it since she's been railing against those responsible, but she's always been a hypocrite so I expect nothing less.
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,057
67
91
Originally posted by: OCguy

Of course people on both sides knew what was going on. That is why there will never be real investigations.

That's why there has to be a full investigation by an independent prosecutor with full subpoena powers. The only way we can atone for the evil of this criminality and grow beyond it is to expose everyone who was party to it, regardless of party affiliation, and, at a minimum, to prosecute those ordered and carried out these heinous crimes for what they are, violations of U.S. and international laws against torture and other war crimes and crimes against humanity.
 

cubby1223

Lifer
May 24, 2004
13,518
42
86
Originally posted by: Harvey
Originally posted by: OCguy

Of course people on both sides knew what was going on. That is why there will never be real investigations.

That's why there has to be a full investigation by an independent prosecutor with full subpoena powers. The only way we can atone for the evil of this criminality and grow beyond it is to expose everyone who was party to it, regardless of party affiliation, and, at a minimum, to prosecute those ordered and carried out these heinous crimes for what they are, violations of U.S. and international laws against torture and other war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Who are you, really? Every post you make on this subject you are doing so seemingly with an agenda much bigger than just one's personal feelings.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
Originally posted by: Harvey
Originally posted by: OCguy

Of course people on both sides knew what was going on. That is why there will never be real investigations.

That's why there has to be a full investigation by an independent prosecutor with full subpoena powers. The only way we can atone for the evil of this criminality and grow beyond it is to expose everyone who was party to it, regardless of party affiliation, and, at a minimum, to prosecute those ordered and carried out these heinous crimes for what they are, violations of U.S. and international laws against torture and other war crimes and crimes against humanity.

And how would you propose replacing the Senate?
 

marincounty

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2005
3,227
5
76
Originally posted by: Double Trouble
Originally posted by: Lemon law
I suspect that what the CIA is saying and what they actually told Pelosi are two different things, but I do not buy the argument that if Pelosi said OK, its excuses anything. And if Pelosi is forced to resign her speaker post as a result, I for one will think its a good thing.

No one morally bankrupt enough to excuse torture should remain in leading government roles, no exceptions.

Its just another very poorly reasoned GOP argument and they as a party are as or more guilty than Pelosi for thinking its a good argument. But if the GOP wants consistency, and bouncing Pelosi is req

Huh? By what leap of logic do you turn this on the GOP? The question is not if waterboarding etc was "OK" -- that's another discussion (I believe it's torture and should never have been used) -- the issue is whether Pelosi's been lying about this. She was briefed on it, as was Goss and later others. They probably had reservations but were led to believe or believed that it was needed. Now it's politically inexpedient for her to admit to it since she's been railing against those responsible, but she's always been a hypocrite so I expect nothing less.

Uhh, the GOP, GWB and Dick Cheney created the legal opinions that allowed torture?
You noticed that Pelosi wasn't allowed to share this information with anyone.

Pelosi has always been a hypocrite? How so. She was a not well known congressperson till she became speaker. Had you even heard of her before that?

I think Pelosi must be doing a terrific job if she has so many righties panties in a bunch.
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,057
67
91
Originally posted by: blackangst1

That's why there has to be a full investigation by an independent prosecutor with full subpoena powers. The only way we can atone for the evil of this criminality and grow beyond it is to expose everyone who was party to it, regardless of party affiliation, and, at a minimum, to prosecute those ordered and carried out these heinous crimes for what they are, violations of U.S. and international laws against torture and other war crimes and crimes against humanity.

And how would you propose replacing the Senate?[/quote]

At the risk of a blatant statement of the obvious, that's the reason for an independent prosecutor.

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: cubby1223

Who are you, really?

Harvey-Bot 2000

I thought everyone knew he was an artificial intelligence. Key word being artificial.

As opposed to your very real stupidty. :laugh:
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
Originally posted by: Harvey
Originally posted by: blackangst1

That's why there has to be a full investigation by an independent prosecutor with full subpoena powers. The only way we can atone for the evil of this criminality and grow beyond it is to expose everyone who was party to it, regardless of party affiliation, and, at a minimum, to prosecute those ordered and carried out these heinous crimes for what they are, violations of U.S. and international laws against torture and other war crimes and crimes against humanity.

And how would you propose replacing the Senate?

At the risk of a blatant statement of the obvious, that's the reason for an independent prosecutor.

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: cubby1223

Who are you, really?

Harvey-Bot 2000

I thought everyone knew he was an artificial intelligence. Key word being artificial.

As opposed to your very real stupidty. :laugh:[/quote]

No. You didnt understand. I mean, how would you REPLACE the senate. Since they would be prosecuted and sent away (in your world). Would this independant councel find replacements?
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,057
67
91
Originally posted by: blackangst1

No. You didnt understand. I mean, how would you REPLACE the senate. Since they would be prosecuted and sent away (in your world). Would this independant councel find replacements?

My, aren't you a presumtuous little boy! :roll:

Any such investigation could involve members of the House, as well. There's enough info in the public domain to know your thankfully EX-Traitor In Chief and his criminal henchmen are up to their eyeballs in ordering torture, but you don't know all the facts. Neither do I.

The answer is to start by finding the truth and making all of it public. As a nation, we're strong enough to deal with the reality we find, as long as we're strong enough to pursue that truth. The only way we fail and destroy our nation for ourselves and in the eyes of the world is to ignore the crimes the Bushwhackos committed in our name or attempt to sweep them under the proverbial rug.

The rest of the world won't allow that to happen. There are already prosecutions under way in Spain and Italy. The matter will probably end up before the World Court at the Hague. The only way we can regain our credibility in the world community is to stand up and face the truth about the horrific crimes committed by our own leaders.
 

chucky2

Lifer
Dec 9, 1999
10,018
37
91
Originally posted by: Harvey
... The only way we can regain our credibility in the world community is to stand up and face the truth about the horrific crimes committed by our own leaders.

HahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHa
hahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHaha
hahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahaha
haHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahaha
HahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHa
hahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHaha
hahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahaha
haHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahaha
HahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHa
hahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHaha
hahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahaha
haHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahaha
HahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHa
hahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHaha
hahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahaha
haHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahaha
HahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahaha


World community....oh my god, that was F'ing hilarious...thanks Harvey for that before I have to commute on home, god that was good...

Chuck
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Of course she was, she was on the senate intelligence committee.

Krauthammer had a good commentary on this subject last weekend.

http://www.realclearpolitics.c...e_no_except_96283.html

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
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,057
67
91
Originally posted by: chucky2

Originally posted by: Harvey
... The only way we can regain our credibility in the world community is to stand up and face the truth about the horrific crimes committed by our own leaders.

HahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHa
hahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHaha...

World community....oh my god, that was F'ing hilarious...thanks Harvey for that before I have to commute on home, god that was good...

Chuck

Have fun, and go Chuck yourself with the fact that the United States is bound by international laws and treaties to arrest any U.S. citizen charged by any other any nation with war crimes or crimes against humanity and deliver them to the World Court for trial.

I support the Constitution, the laws and the integrity of the United States of America. What's your lameass excuse? :roll:

Originally posted by: Genx87

Of course she was, she was on the senate intelligence committee.

Do I get credit for supporting investigation and, where warranted, prosecution of anyone from any party who is responsible for committing torture and other war crimes?
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Originally posted by: Harvey
Originally posted by: chucky2

Originally posted by: Harvey
... The only way we can regain our credibility in the world community is to stand up and face the truth about the horrific crimes committed by our own leaders.

HahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHa
hahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHahahahaHaha...

World community....oh my god, that was F'ing hilarious...thanks Harvey for that before I have to commute on home, god that was good...

Chuck

Have fun, and go Chuck yourself with the fact that the United States is bound by international laws and treaties to arrest any U.S. citizen charged by any other any nation with war crimes or crimes against humanity and deliver them to the World Court for trial.

How many times has this happened? And I thought the Surpreme Court ruled while we technically bound by international law we arent forced to enforce it.
 

BoberFett

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
37,562
9
81
Originally posted by: Harvey
Originally posted by: BoberFett
Originally posted by: cubby1223
Who are you, really?
Harvey-Bot 2000

I thought everyone knew he was an artificial intelligence. Key word being artificial.
As opposed to your very real stupidty. :laugh:

LOL, I'll give you that point. Burn. :)
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,057
67
91
Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Harvey

Have fun, and go Chuck yourself with the fact that the United States is bound by international laws and treaties to arrest any U.S. citizen charged by any other any nation with war crimes or crimes against humanity and deliver them to the World Court for trial.

How many times has this happened? And I thought the Surpreme Court ruled while we technically bound by international law we arent forced to enforce it.

Think whatever you want. The fact is, anyone charged with war crimes or crimes against humanity will be subject to arrest anywhere they go in the world, and they won't find much peace wherever they travel, here, either.

Why would anyone, especially any self styled, so-called "conservative" who supports our own Constitution and the rule of law NOT want those who committed such heinous crimes prosecuted under our own system of justice, let alone support shielding such ciminals from justice under international law? :roll:
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Originally posted by: Harvey
Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Harvey

Have fun, and go Chuck yourself with the fact that the United States is bound by international laws and treaties to arrest any U.S. citizen charged by any other any nation with war crimes or crimes against humanity and deliver them to the World Court for trial.

How many times has this happened? And I thought the Surpreme Court ruled while we technically bound by international law we arent forced to enforce it.

Think whatever you want. The fact is, anyone charged with war crimes or crimes against humanity will be subject to arrest anywhere they go in the world, and they won't find much peace wherever they travel, here, either.

Why would anyone, especially any self styled, so-called "conservative" who supports our own Constitution and the rule of law NOT want those who committed such heinous crimes prosecuted under our own system of justice, let alone support shielding such ciminals from justice under international law? :roll:


I am not passing judgement only asking you to provide any time this has happened before?
That said I wouldnt support an international show trial US citizens in an international court. Try them within our country or not at all.
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,057
67
91
Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Harvey

Think whatever you want. The fact is, anyone charged with war crimes or crimes against humanity will be subject to arrest anywhere they go in the world, and they won't find much peace wherever they travel, here, either.

Why would anyone, especially any self styled, so-called "conservative" who supports our own Constitution and the rule of law NOT want those who committed such heinous crimes prosecuted under our own system of justice, let alone support shielding such ciminals from justice under international law? :roll:

I am not passing judgement only asking you to provide any time this has happened before?

I AM passing judgment on the right and wrong of bringing criminals to justice, regardless of how many times it has happened in the past... and it has. Slobodan Milosovic died in custody awaiting sentence. Once they're tried and convictedI wish George W. Bush and his gang of criminals long lives in prison.

That said I wouldnt support an international show trial US citizens in an international court. Try them within our country or not at all.

I would prefer to see the Bushwhacko criminals and anyone else involved in toture tried and convicted here under U.S. law. That said, I would strongly support trials at the ICC if we can't have the courage to uphold our own laws against such heinous acts as torture.