Go Back   Club Conspiracy Forums > Current events > Latest News
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 05-18-2009, 11:29 PM
BlueAngel BlueAngel is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 10,799
Default Re: IT'S CALLED TORTURE and NOT INTERROGATION TECHNIQUES!


Excerpt:

"But he contended Pelosi has not done an adequate job of pointing out that her version of the September 2002 briefing was largely backed by public statements from former Sen. Bob Graham, D-Fla. (1987-2005).

Known for his detailed note-taking, Graham -- chairman of the Select Committee on Intelligence in 2002 -- has said that he also does not recall the CIA informing him at that time that waterboarding was being used. Pelosi was ranking member on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence in September 2002."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So, Peolsi was a ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence in September, 2002 and Graham was the Chairman.

Kindly inform me as to which position, Chariman (Graham) or Ranking Member (Peolosi) has authority over the other.

If you advise me that the Chairman, Graham's position, was above Pelosi's position (ranking member) then I would suggest you bring Bob Graham into the discussions.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Pelosi, Surrogates Attempt to Outspin Republicans Over CIA Controversy

Pelosi, Surrogates Attempt to Outspin Republicans Over CIA Controversy

AP – By Edward Epstein, CQ Staff Edward Epstein, Cq Staff –

Mon May 18, 9:51 pm ET

Bruised by a controversy over what she knew about interrogation techniques in the previous administration, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., is drawing on an arsenal of not-so-secret weapons to beat back Republican critics.

With a new CNN poll showing a spike in Pelosi's disapproval ratings since mid-March, her team is trying to manage what is arguably the most serious crisis of her speakership.

To deprive the GOP of new fuel, staff members have stopped responding to the Republicans' increasingly pointed attacks. Pelosi herself has stayed off the public stage since her remarks at a May 14 news conference inflamed the controversy, though she is still scheduled to hold her weekly news conference May 21.

Surrogates tapped to handle the weekend talk shows were armed with talking points charging that the GOP was trying to divert attention from the Bush administration's controversial interrogation methods.

Steve Cohen, D-Tenn., said Monday that GOP criticism of Pelosi only helps her with Democrats. "It's a badge of honor," he said. "It shows they know she is an effective Speaker. And it's all a diversion from the main issue of what the Bush-Cheney administration did."

On Monday, the Republican National Committee released a Web video in response to what it called the Speaker's "irresponsible and confusing responses to top secret CIA briefings." The video spliced her statements with theme music and images from James Bond movies.

Mike Simpson of Idaho cautioned fellow Republicans to stay out of the controversy. "We should keep our mouths shut," he said. "She seems to be doing enough damage herself."

At issue are comments she made at the May 14 news conference: During a September 2002 classified briefing, she reiterated, she was told that "enhanced interrogation techniques," such as waterboarding, had been authorized, but not that they had been employed on suspected terrorists.

And, she went on, the CIA misled Congress by not informing lawmakers at that briefing that the harsh interrogation techniques had already been used. Agency records indicate she was informed that the techniques were used; she said she did not learn of their use until 2003.

Pelosi and her team are counting on a busy legislative week and the Memorial Day recess to quell the controversy. If they succeed, they will help President Obama refocus attention on his agenda. But if she fails to divert attention from the issue or if new disclosures raise more questions, the controversy will persist.

'Credibility Dented' Nevertheless, it's hard to find anyone who realistically thinks that Pelosi's 2½-year tenure as the first female Speaker -- and the first Democrat to hold the post since 1995 -- is in jeopardy.

"I think the controversy eventually dies down, with her credibility dented but her speakership unthreatened," said John J. Pitney, a former GOP House staffer who is now a political analyst at Claremont McKenna College in California.

Peter Fenn, a Washington-based Democratic consultant, said: "Any time you take a pounding like she has over the past several days, you have to rebound. Democrats are standing by her, so she won't lose her speakership over this, that's for sure."

Fenn said that dispatching allies to argue the real issue is interrogation practices in the Bush administration, and not what Pelosi recalled at one meeting, was "wise."

But he contended Pelosi has not done an adequate job of pointing out that her version of the September 2002 briefing was largely backed by public statements from former Sen. Bob Graham, D-Fla. (1987-2005).

Known for his detailed note-taking, Graham -- chairman of the Select Committee on Intelligence in 2002 -- has said that he also does not recall the CIA informing him at that time that waterboarding was being used. Pelosi was ranking member on the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence in September 2002.

On May 15, CIA Director Leon E. Panetta, who served in Congress with Pelosi, issued a terse statement, seen as a rebuke to the Speaker: "It is not our policy or practice to mislead Congress."

Even though Pelosi is likely to surmount her difficulty, barring any new disclosures, that doesn't mean she has been at her best, said Sherry Bebitch Jeffe of the University of Southern California.

"She hasn't handled it at all well," by seeming to change her story and by parsing words, Jeffe said. And if the negative fallout persists, it will be "bad news" for Obama, who has a close, admiring ally in Pelosi.

On Monday, Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs declined for a second time to get drawn into the fracas but said the president has confidence in the Speaker.

Minority Leader John A. Boehner, R‑Ohio, said over the weekend that Pelosi should either produce evidence that the CIA misled her or apologize. Former Speaker Newt Gingrich (1989-99) has called Pelosi's ability to remain Speaker into question.

Jeffe said such pointed criticism, especially from the controversial Gingrich, is music to Pelosi's ears.

"If I were Nancy Pelosi I'd send Newt Gingrich a big thank-you note for calling for her ouster," Jeffe said. "Democrats are not going to allow Newt Gingrich or any other Republican to throw their leader overboard."


Last edited by BlueAngel : 05-19-2009 at 08:11 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 05-18-2009, 11:58 PM
BlueAngel BlueAngel is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 10,799
Default Re: IT'S CALLED TORTURE and NOT INTERROGATION TECHNIQUES!

Bob Graham was the Chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee in 2002 when he and Nancy Pelosi were supposedly informed about "water boarding" and the "enhanced interrogation techniques" that the CIA would be using on inmates at GITMO.

Nancy Pelosi was a "ranking member" at the time on this committee and Bob Graham was the Chairman.

This means that Bob Graham held a higher position within this committee than Nancy Pelosi.

Therefore, Bob Graham should be called into this discussion.

I would like to know the names of the other members who comprised the Senate Intelligence Committee in 2002 and those who were informed as to what "interrogation techniques" the CIA planned to use on the inmates at GITMO and those who weren't.

Just because Graham is no longer a politician doesn't preclude him from being questioned about this matter.

Last edited by BlueAngel : 05-19-2009 at 07:54 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 05-19-2009, 12:39 AM
BlueAngel BlueAngel is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 10,799
Default Re: IT'S CALLED TORTURE and NOT INTERROGATION TECHNIQUES!

What is the point of having a House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence if the entire COMMITTEE is not involved in the INTELLIGENCE that is proposed?

Convenient for the CIA, I would suggest so they can have thier scapegoats and no witnesses.

Are we to believe that only Pelosi and Graham comprised this committee in 2002 or that, of all the members, only Pelosi and Graham were briefed by the CIA who sought their approval for the torture they inflicted on the inmates at GITMO so they could be the scapegoats when this became a public matter?

Again.

If only Pelosi and Graham were briefed and the committee is comprised of more members than these two, what is the point of having a committee?

To pick and chose thier scapegoats.

Graham is no longer a political figure since he lost his bid for presidential office.

How convenient.

Does that mean that he cannot be questioned as to this matter?

What are the names of the other members of this committee in 2002 and the names of those members who were briefed by the CIA as to their intents of the GITMO prisoners and those who weren't.

Are you telling me that Pelosi and Graham were the only members of the Intelligence Committee who were briefed by the CIA as to their intents and purposes of the inmates at GITMO?

Two people comprised this Committee?

If not, why were the other members not in the loop?

So the CIA could have a scapegoat?

It's not that difficult.

A list of the names of the members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence in 2002.

Those who were present for the CIA's briefing as to what they would be inflicting upon the inmates at GITMO and those who weren't.

A list of names of every member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence in 2002 is what I request.

Those who were briefed by the CIA as to the "torture techniques" to be used on GITMO inmates and those who weren't.

Last edited by BlueAngel : 05-19-2009 at 07:51 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 05-19-2009, 01:16 AM
BlueAngel BlueAngel is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 10,799
Default Re: IT'S CALLED TORTURE and NOT INTERROGATION TECHNIQUES!

Excerpt:

"In the original column, Dowd wrote: "More and more the timeline is raising the question of why, if the torture was to prevent terrorist attacks, it seemed to happen mainly during the period when the Bush crowd was looking for what was essentially political information to justify the invasion of Iraq."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Huh?

The Bush crowd never, ever used torture at GITMO to justify the invasion of Iraq.

The reasons were:

"Yellow cake from Nigeria"

"Harboring Al-Qaeda."

"An iminent threat to the US, etc."

For goodnesssakes, if you're going to plagerize, try plagerizing a truism.

NY Times columnist admits using blogger's words

NY Times columnist admits using blogger's words

In this file photo, New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd speaks on 'Meet the Press' during a taping … Mon May 18, 12:13 pm ET

NEW YORK – New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd has admitted to using a paragraph virtually word-for-word from a prominent liberal blogger without attribution.

Dowd acknowledged the error in an e-mail to The Huffington Post on Sunday, the Web site reported. The Times corrected her column online to give proper credit for the material to Talking Points Memo editor Josh Marshall.

The newspaper issued a formal correction Monday saying Dowd "failed to attribute a paragraph about the timeline for prisoner abuse" to Marshall's blog.

The error appeared in Dowd's Sunday column, in which she criticized the Bush administration's use of interrogation methods in the run-up to the Iraq war.

In the original column, Dowd wrote: "More and more the timeline is raising the question of why, if the torture was to prevent terrorist attacks, it seemed to happen mainly during the period when the Bush crowd was looking for what was essentially political information to justify the invasion of Iraq."

Marshall last week wrote virtually the same sentence. But where Dowd's column used the phrase "the Bush crowd was," Marshall used "we were."

Dowd, who won a Pulitzer Prize for commentary in 1999, told The Huffington Post that the mistake was unintentional. She claims she never read Marshall's post last week and had heard the line from a friend who did not mention reading it in Marshall's blog.

A spokeswoman for the Times late Sunday referred requests for comment from The Associated Press to remarks Dowd made to The Huffington Post.

In the updated version on the Times' site, Dowd's column had this note: "An earlier version of this column failed to attribute a paragraph about the timeline for prisoner abuse to Josh Marshall's blog at Talking Points Memo."

(This version CORRECTS that Dowd won the Pulitzer in 1999, not 1990.)
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 05-19-2009, 01:56 AM
BlueAngel BlueAngel is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 10,799
Default Re: IT'S CALLED TORTURE and NOT INTERROGATION TECHNIQUES!

I have one thing to say to you, Nancy.

Thank you for embroiling our country in this torture scandal.

If not for you, the GITMO prisoners would have never been tortured.

It's all your fault.

If only you would have said NO to the CIA when they said they weren't going to water board the inmates, they would have listened and not one single prisoner at GITMO would have been tortured.

After all, the CIA has never incarcerated children in trauma-based mind control programs; funded their black operations by aiding the Mafia in child pornography and illegal drug distribution.

The CIA is a moral and ethic organization and you have corrupted them.

Thanks for shattering my illusion.

Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 05-19-2009, 01:28 PM
Darth Cacodaemon Darth Cacodaemon is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 179
Default Re: IT'S CALLED TORTURE and NOT INTERROGATION TECHNIQUES!

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueAngel View Post
I have one thing to say to you, Nancy.

Thank you for embroiling our country in this torture scandal.

If not for you, the GITMO prisoners would have never been tortured.

It's all your fault.

If only you would have said NO to the CIA when they said they weren't going to water board the inmates, they would have listened and not one single prisoner at GITMO would have been tortured.

After all, the CIA has never incarcerated children in trauma-based mind control programs; funded their black operations by aiding the Mafia in child pornography and illegal drug distribution.

The CIA is a moral and ethic organization and you have corrupted them.

Thanks for shattering my illusion.

KOO KOO !! KOO KOO!!
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 05-22-2009, 10:42 PM
BlueAngel BlueAngel is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 10,799
Default Re: IT'S CALLED TORTURE and NOT INTERROGATION TECHNIQUES!

Pelosi seems to be weathering the storm just fine.

Could it be because the CIA has less credibility than she does?

Pelosi seems to be weathering Republican criticism just fine - Yahoo! News

Pelosi seems to be weathering Republican criticism just fine

AP – By David Lightman, McClatchy Newspapers
Fri May 22, 2009
4:56 pm ET

WASHINGTON — House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has avoided serious damage from the relentless Republican effort to discredit her, though there's some evidence that the GOP is making small inroads.

Republicans have been battering the California Democrat over her assertion that the CIA misled her in 2002 about whether terrorism suspects had been tortured.

"This is a case where Republicans can't go much lower than they find themselves," said Steven Smith , a congressional expert at Washington University in St. Louis , "so they have to go after the other side with whatever they can."

So far, though, Pelosi remains a very strong House speaker. She can claim a string of major legislative victories since January, including this week's passage of bills to give consumers more protection against credit card abuses and to crack down on financial fraud.

Her Democratic Party has a 78-seat majority in the House of Representatives , and few if any of them are willing to criticize the speaker.

"At the end of the day, the focus will be on the torture policy," not Pelosi's recollections, said Rep. Xavier Becerra , D- Calif.

A May 19 Gallup Poll brought sobering news to Pelosi, however.

"Pelosi (is) largely losing the public relations game, as she gets a significantly more negative review for her handling of the matter than do the other major players in the controversy, including the CIA ," Gallup analyst Jeffrey Jones said.

Those who are paying close attention to the flap_ only 22 percent of Americans, the survey found — disapprove of her handling of the matter by 63 to 30 percent. That's a small sample, however, and Jones said that "if Democrats stand behind her, she's pretty safe, unless something else comes out that makes her story seem less plausible."

It appears that the public simply isn't very interested. Carroll Doherty , an associate director of the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press , which also conducts national surveys, found that last week the story was "getting some attention for an inside Washington story, but it's a modest number."

Last week's Pew survey found that 67 percent had heard about the closing of General Motors and Chrysler dealerships, but only 38 percent were aware of the Pelosi story.

Republicans are hoping to build a drumbeat of criticism that builds to a crescendo in time for the 2010 elections.

"She's certainly a more opportune target than President ( Barack) Obama ," said Peter Brown , a political analyst for the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute .

Republicans, including House GOP leader John Boehner of Ohio , haven't always been so quick to take umbrage at those who question the intelligence community's credibility. In 2007, Boehner said the intelligence community had misled him about Iran . This week, he said, "We are mixing apples and oranges here. It's different" because when the national intelligence estimate with regard to Iran was released, "it contradicted most everything I had been told in the six months leading up to it, and that's why I questioned what was coming out of this group that put the report together."

In addition, in an opinion piece last month in The Washington Post , former Rep. Porter Goss , R- Fla. , former House Intelligence Committee chairman and later CIA director, said that "I am slack-jawed to read that members claim to have not understood that the techniques on which they were briefed were to actually be employed," suggesting that briefers didn't explicitly inform top members of Congress that detainees already had been waterboarded. However, Goss went on to say that key Democratic and Republican lawmakers well understood what the CIA was doing and raised no objections to it.

House Republicans tried and failed Thursday to create a special congressional panel to "review and verify the accuracy of the speaker's" statements. Rep. Steve King , R- Iowa , called Friday for Pelosi's security clearance to be revoked.

Pelosi brushed it all aside Friday at a news conference that she called to announce that she wasn't going to talk about it anymore.

"I have made the statement that I'm going to make on this. I don't have anything more to say about it," she said. "I stand by my comment. And what we are doing is staying on our course, and not being distracted from it in this distractive mode."

ON THE WEB

Pew News Interest Index

Gallup poll on Pelosi and other topics

Boehner on Pelosi

House roll call vote on committee to investigate the speaker ("yea" vote kills the plan)

MORE FROM MCCLATCHY

Congress battles over paying for wars, Guantanamo

Pelosi says CIA misled lawmakers on torture

FBI interrogator calls harsh techniques 'ineffective'
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 05-23-2009, 08:43 PM
BlueAngel BlueAngel is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 10,799
Default Re: IT'S CALLED TORTURE and NOT INTERROGATION TECHNIQUES!

Torture is not effective in EXTRACTING the truth.

It is effective in forcing the victim to say whatever it is the torturer's want them to say so the torture will cease.

As far as I'm concerned, no one should be interrogated by the police when they are suspected of a crime unless an attorney is present.

Regarding the following video clip from The View.

Whoppi, just to set the record straight, since you stated that Nancy Pelosi lied, she did not.

There has been no proof offered that Pelosi lied as far as being briefed about the CIA's intentions to water-board inmates at GITMO other than what the CIA has provided.

This, coming from an entity that operates in secret and not within the law.

According to Bob Graham who was the Chairman of the Intelligence Committee and present during the meetings between Pelosi, himself and the CIA, he was recently interviewed on the radio and Mr. Graham stated that the dates the CIA provided as the dates they briefed himself and Pelosi about water boarding were inaccurate and he, too, has no recollection of the issue of water boarding being presented.

I will reiterate again.

The issue is not whether Pelosi lied.

The issue is about the criminal acts conducted by the CIA and the criminals in the White House who were conspirators.

Bob Graham was known for keeping meticulous records.

Is Bob Graham lieing, too?

Jesse Ventura was a guest on The View.

Mr. Ventura made the point that during the Bush/Cheney era, the American people were continuously lied too, and their resignation was not demanded.

Nancy Pelosi is being used a a scape goat for the criminal acts conducted by the CIA.

What else is new?

Ventura said that if he water-boarded Cheney for an hour, he'd have him confessing to the Sharon Tate murder.

I'd like to correct Mr. Ventura.

He stated that the CIA ONLY tortures those of dark skin color.

That would be wrong.

The color of one's skin has no significance.

I'm Caucasian.

I would know.

As for Cheney, why has he come out from behind the curtain?


Last edited by BlueAngel : 05-23-2009 at 08:50 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 05-23-2009, 08:55 PM
BlueAngel BlueAngel is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 10,799
Default Re: IT'S CALLED TORTURE and NOT INTERROGATION TECHNIQUES!

Stooping to the usual levels.

Take note in bold.

RNC's below-the-belt shot at Pelosi - Yahoo! News

RNC's below-the-belt shot at Pelosi

AP – Andie Coller – Sat May 23, 2009 7:59 am ET

She’s the 69-year-old speaker of the House of Representatives, second in the line of succession and the most powerful woman in U.S. history.

But when you see Nancy Pelosi, the Republican National Committee wants you to think “Pussy Galore.”

At least that’s the takeaway from a video released by the committee this week – a video that puts Pelosi side-by-side with the aforementioned villainess from the 1964 James Bond film “Goldfinger.”

The RNC video, which begins with the speaker’s head in the iconic spy-series gun sight, implies that Pelosi has used her feminine wiles to dodge the truth about whether or not she was briefed by the CIA on the use of waterboarding in 2002. While the P-word is never mentioned directly, in one section the speaker appears in a split screen alongside the Bond nemesis – and the video’s tagline is “Democrats Galore.”

The wisdom of equating the first woman speaker of the House with a character whose first name also happens to be among the most vulgar terms for a part of the female anatomy might be debated – if the RNC were willing to do so, which it was not. An RNC spokesperson refused repeated requests by POLITICO to explain the point of the video, or the intended connection between Pelosi and Galore.

But what isn’t open to debate is that the waterboarding conflict has been accompanied by a cascade of attacks on the speaker, not as a leader or a legislator, but as a woman.

Earlier this week, Pittsburgh radio host Jim Quinn referred to the speaker on his program as “this bitch”; last week, syndicated radio host Neal Boortz opined “how fun it is to watch that hag out there twisting in the wind.”

There has also been a steady stream of taunts about the speaker’s appearance, and whether it’s been surgically enhanced. On CNN’s “State of the Union,” Republican strategist Alex Castellanos said, “I think if Speaker Pelosi were still capable of human facial expression, we’d see she’d be embarrassed.”

Even erstwhile presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee took the time to pen a poem that begins:

“Here's a story about a lady named Nancy / A ruthless politician, but dressed very fancy.”

One might argue that face-lift and fashion gibes are just sauce for the goose these days – especially given the president’s crack about John Boehner’s perma-tan during the White House Correspondents’ Association Dinner.

But “hag”? The P-word? Really?

Not only is it bad form, say Democrats and women’s advocates, it’s bad politics.

“They can’t seem to distinguish between a backroom smirk among the boys and something you put out in public,” says former Hillary Clinton senior adviser Ann Lewis of the RNC video.

“It’s an attempt to demean your opponent, rather than debate them. If they’re serious that this is an issue of national security, then you’d think that one would want to debate it on the merits,” she says. “It’s almost as if they can’t help themselves.”

Of course, not all – or even most – of the recent attacks on Pelosi have involved her gender. Indeed, inside the Beltway, the criticism of the speaker has been almost entirely above the belt. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich has called for Pelosi’s resignation without making cracks about her looks. Former Vice President Dick Cheney called her out Thursday without taking note of her gender. House Minority Leader John Boehner – who wants to move more slowly against Pelosi than some of his more aggressive House brethren – has kept up the pressure on her without marginalizing her as a woman.

Eleanor Smeal, president of the Feminist Majority Foundation, believes that those who attack female leaders on gender grounds do so out of weakness.

“In a way, it shows the desperation of the opposition,” she says. “If all else fails, you do something on their looks, or you remind them of sex.”

Phil Singer, who dealt with the issue as a spokesman for Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, takes it one step further, arguing that such tactics are actually likely to be counterproductive in the end.

“As the degree of viciousness escalates and increases, I think women – and most people living in the modern era, including men – are more likely to rally to Pelosi’s cause,” he says.

He suggests that gender-based attacks can actually be the crucible within which a woman’s base of support is forged.

“Certainly nobody wants to be on the receiving end of this type of rhetoric, but in the long run I think it could end up making Nancy Pelosi a stronger national figure, and creating a real base for her,” he says.

While Pelosi has long had to endure her share of sexist sniping, Marie Wilson, president of The White House Project, which promotes women’s leadership, believes that the fact that the speaker’s clash with the CIA centers on truthfulness may have contributed to the recent rash.

“When I first saw this come up, I thought, ‘Oh no, it’s about honesty,’” she says.

Wilson – who gasped audibly when the RNC video was described to her – explains that her organization’s research has found that honesty and trustworthiness are the two areas in which Americans have higher expectations of women in politics than they do of men. And when women in power are viewed as or accused of being less than fully honest, she says, “that strikes at the heart of the cultural ideal in this country – wives, mothers, apple pie.”

However, she notes, “If a man gets in a situation about he-said, she-said, or what people knew, you don’t go to his maleness as a way to attack him.”

The reasons for them may be ineffable, but the attacks themselves seem to be all but inevitable for prominent or outspoken women – Republicans as well as Democrats. Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin was called a “bimbo” by “Politically Incorrect” host Bill Maher during the campaign; Meghan McCain has had to grapple with public attacks on her appearance from radio host Laura Ingraham.

(Palin’s office did not respond to a call from POLITICO on the Pelosi matter, and McCain declined to comment. None of the House or Senate Republicans contacted by POLITICO was both available and willing to comment on the RNC video.)

Says Singer: “It’s perverse in a way that to become a very strong figure, or to develop a very strong following, [women] have to go through something like this. I don’t think it’s fair, but certainly recent history suggests that it’s just the way it is.”
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 05-24-2009, 12:23 AM
iHIMself™ iHIMself™ is offline
Free Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 134
Default Re: IT'S CALLED TORTURE and NOT INTERROGATION TECHNIQUES!

'In the media, waterboarding is called "simulated drowning," but that's a misnomer. It does not simulate drowning, as the lungs are actually filling with water. There is no way to simulate that. The victim IS drowning'.

I know waterboarding is torture - because I did it myself

By MALCOLM NANCE
Wednesday, October 31st 2007, 10:52 PM


http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/...e__because.htm
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:41 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.12
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.