There is nothing surprising in the fact that the CIA informed Members of Congress about what they were doing to get information from high value al-Qaeda prisoners. Nor is it surprising that Democrats who were briefed would have kept that information from their colleagues as they were bound to do by law.
Some Republicans are trying to explore the hypocrisy angle by trying to point out that Democrats are hardly in a position to come down on Republicans for torture when their own leadership was privy to the “severe interrogation techniques” being used. I have yet to see any quotes from those who we know were briefed that they then objected to the torture later and used it in a political context to bash their opponents.
In the absence of proof that Pelosi, Reid, Rockefeller, Harman, et al criticized the Administration for their torture policies, it is hard to make the hypocrisy charge stick.
However, they can be and should be excoriated for meekly going along with these policies and not registering their objections in the strongest possible terms. Alone among the Democrats, former ranking minority member of the House Intel Committee Jane Harman says she sent a letter of protest to the CIA questioning their methods to extract information. The letter fell on deaf ears.
Some of the netnuts are twisting themselves into knots to posit the notion that the whole purpose of the briefings was to embarrass the Democrats:
It’s pretty clear that either one of the Republican members of Congress at the meeting, or the CIA, decided to leak what happened at a super-classified post-9/11 briefing in order to embarrass Pelosi and the Democrats. And I don’t doubt for a minute that Bush approved the leak, as he always does.It’s also clear that had Pelosi raised any private objections during the meeting – remember, it took place in the first year after September 11 – Bush and the Republicans would have leaked that fact to the public (like they just did) and destroyed her career and marked her publicly as a traitor. No member of Congress, no American, could have spoken up about anything in the months after September 11 and survived. It’s patently unfair to suggest that somehow because Pelosi didn’t object then that she doesn’t have the right to object now.
One final point. I hope this teaches Pelosi and Reid and all the Democrats that no matter what you do, this administration will mark you as a traitor and try to do destroy you. You might as well fight back and try to win, because if you don’t, you’ll sit back and lose.
Note that not only did some nefarious Republican leak from a “super classified” briefing – as if Avarosis ever gave a crap about leaking from other classified briefings as long as they reflected badly on Republicans – in order to make Pelosi look bad today, they would have leaked back in 2002 if Pelosi had objected to make her look bad today.
Of course, Johnny has no evidence whatsoever that a Republican leaked the story to the Post nor does he have a scintilla of evidence that Bush was behind it. He’s just throwing crap against a wall to see what sticks – a pastime he enjoys immensely when outing gay Republicans who would choose otherwise.
One other major meme that is emerging from the netroots is that since Bush had this meeting hanging over their heads, the Democratic leadership refused to begin impeachment hearings. With that kind of logic, we can expect an immediate effort by Pelosi to start the impeachment bandwagon moving next week now that everything is out in the open.
Fortunately for the republic, Pelosi is a little smarter than the rabid, frothing at the mouth bloggers who would push the Democratic party over the impeachment abyss.
Finally, just for levity’s sake, we now have to 9/11 truthers hot on the trail of the destroyed DVD’s that opened this whole can of worms in the first place. Here’s a comment left on my post on the subject:
The tapes destroyed primarily not because torture but because of what the tapes reveal. Possibly revealing the conspiracies behind 9/11 attack. This is another set of evidence revealing that the 9/11 was an inside job. The secret societies are directly responsible for this. Especially Bush family’s Skull & Bones. 2006 movie “the good shepherdâ€, directed by Robert De Nero, shows how the CIA was formed and the Skull & Bones influence over the intelligence community plus CIA’s torture…
I am not one who believes the republic has been permanently destroyed as a result of the torture authorized by the Administration. Good grief what a shallow and ignorant view of history one must have to believe that nonsense. We survived four score and seven plus years of allowing slavery in this country – even to the point that the government was in cahoots with slave owners in that they went after escaped slaves in the north and depended on revenue gleaned from cotton exports to survive.
There are plenty of sins committed by the United States government – some of which make torturing murderous jihadis look like a walk in the park. The innocents who have been victims of the government down through the years are a much blacker stain than the “severe interrogation techniques” used by the CIA and Army on, by all reports, was an extremely limited number of murderous, cold eyed killers.
Torture is wrong in all cases at all times. But to get hysterical about its implications for the republic, as most on the left seem determined to do, is absurd. Those nations overseas who are saying “American has lost its moral standing” didn’t recognize that standing in the first place. And even if some actually feel that way, I can guarantee that the next time we selflessly give of ourselves to save the victims of some natural disaster or pull some tiny country’s chestnuts out of the fire when it is being bullied by a larger neighbor, talk about America losing “the moral high ground” will disappear fairly quickly.
Let us treat this with the seriousness it deserves without either exaggerating its impact on our history or using it as a political club in a cynical attempt to demonize your political opponents. Torture has been used to our great shame and calumny. But it hardly merits the “end of the republic” rhetoric being bandied about so cavalierly by those whose outrage is nurtured and husbanded against their own government rather than directed equally toward an enemy that seeks to kill us all.
11:04 am
The Thunder Run has linked to this post in the – Web Reconnaissance for 12/10/2007 A short recon of what’s out there that might draw your attention, updated throughout the day…so check back often.
11:07 am
One other major meme that is emerging from the netroots is that since Bush had this meeting hanging over their heads, the Democratic leadership refused to begin impeachment hearings. With that kind of logic, we can expect an immediate effort by Pelosi to start the impeachment bandwagon moving next week now that everything is out in the open.
I think a more plausible explanation is that Pelosi and co refused to begin impeachment hearings against Bush and co because of their tacit approval of the torture policy. In other words, they didn’t think that Bush and co were doing anything wrong.
Though Rick, I quibble with you when you say that those being tortured are necessarily “murderous jihadis.” Whatever happened to the presumption of innocece? Sure, some of those being tortured are “murderous jihadis” and our concerns about their relative comfort are somewhat minimized by this, but its the automatic assumption that everyone we’re holding in Guantanamo is a terrorist that worries me. The assumption that everyone we’re torturing deserves it is NOT a sound legal or moral policy.
11:18 am
By all reports and leaks that have been reported, the number of prisoners (none at Gitmo, btw) who were subjected to torture (or the “enhanced interrogation techniques) is extremely small and represented the cream of al-Qaeda leadership and people who would necessarily know about potential ops.
Those at Gitmo who were subject to other torture techniques like stress positions, sleep deprivation, and other Geneva convention violations were not authorized by the Administration to do so but carried them out independently.
One can make the argument that all torture carried out everywhere by Americans was the fault of the Administration but I believe that is overstating the case. Clearly, there was torture authorized by the White House and torture carried out by independent commands – out of control MP’s and the like. To say it was all authorized is belied by the facts.
2:22 pm
“I can guarantee that the next time we selflessly give of ourselves to save the victims of some natural disaster or pull some tiny country’s chestnuts out of the fire when it is being bullied by a larger neighbor, talk about America losing “the moral high ground†will disappear fairly quickly.”
I would disagree that our charity is “selfless”. It might look that way on the surface, but if you follow the money our moral awesomeness is only a fraction of the story. Not that I care much. I mean, you’ve gotta spend money to make money and helping potential customers out of a jam does well for word of mouth advertising.
5:24 pm
I find America’s sacrifices for freedom very much esteemed by our allies, such as the French, Italians, Spanish, etc who have never failed to express their confidence in American policies or motives. End snicker.
I find the entire controversy regarding torture a complete joke. American troops did this in WWII to extract vital data, they even did it after the war to secure information about alledged war crimes. There is no doubt that this method has value otherwise it would have died centuries ago. The folks who constantly say you can’t rely on this data simply fail to explain why it is unreliable as if their assertions make it true.
Sun Tzu said a leader who ws restrained in his use of force during war was all ready defeated just about sums up what these people wish. War isn’t about moral high grounds it is about winning.
There is no substitute for victory and people who tell us differently do not wish America well, and would never serve nor fight for the USA, regardless of the cause. To heed their advice is to court disaster.
10:34 am
“Of course, Johnny has no evidence whatsoever that a Republican leaked the story to the Post nor does he have a scintilla of evidence that Bush was behind it. He’s just throwing crap against a wall to see what sticks – a pastime he enjoys immensely when outing gay Republicans who would choose otherwise.”
So do you think a Democrat leaked this to make his/her own party look bad? If not, what other possibility is there?