Who is right, Pelosi or Panetta?

[Liebling:-)))]

who is exactly "his" people???? The Republican Party does not like Bush!!!

Those people, I call is "his people" or "his companians" who authoritze the torture and torture the victims, not Republicans or Bush Admin.

It doesn´t mean that the Republicans Party doesn´t like Bush that´s because they disasgree with him.

in this country - you are allowed to voice your objection. Pelosi did not make any objection. No such record of her objections to the interrogation techniques existed.

You can´t deny that there´re many proofs about harsh interrogation (torture/mistreatment techniques) was existed.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

If Pelosi had been a Republican, she would have been forced to resign by now.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

I don't know who "News TV" is but according to the Associated Press:

Is it forbidden to share what I know from New TV, I watched ? Her own word over read any articles about her also Panetta´s word as well?

"Pelosi was unusually harsh in describing the CIA.

'They mislead us all the time,' she said. Asked whether the agency had lied, Pelosi said yes."

Pelosi: CIA misled her on waterboarding

Perhaps you are referring to the backpedaling she did the next day.

Sorry, I don´t read Yahoo´s article. From the reading the link, you provided that the author who wrote about them.

 

[Jiro]

Is it forbidden to share what I know from New TV, I watched ? Her own word over read any articles about her also Panetta´s word as well?

You misunderstood Reba's post. She does not know who you're talking about because the news she found contradicted with what you heard from news. Next time - post the source. It's possible that you misunderstood the news. Who knows? That's why it's best to post the source.

Sorry, I don´t read Yahoo´s article. From the reading the link, you provided that the author who wrote about them.

why not? I just read the article and it's nearly same as any news - ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, etc.

 

[deafskeptic]

It doesn't bother you that the person third in line to the presidency can't be trusted to tell the truth?

Besides, it's the Democrats that brought up the subject of waterboarding, so it must be important to them.

In the previous adminstration, our commander in chief wasn't exactly known for being thruthful. As yet, there is no evidience that I know of against Pelosi so it's premature to accuse her of lying.

 

[Jiro]

Those people, I call is "his people" or "his companians" who authoritze the torture and torture the victims, not Republicans or Bush Admin.

It doesn´t mean that the Republicans Party doesn´t like Bush that´s because they disasgree with him.

I see! so his companions.... are the one who authorized the torture.... so since Pelosi was the ranking member in House Intelligence Committee, she was briefed on enhanced interrogation techniques as reported from the link in your post #150. Since Pelosi did not register her objection, that means she must be one of Bush's companions.

You can´t deny that there´re many proofs about harsh interrogation (torture/mistreatment techniques) was existed.

This is not about if harsh interrogation was used or not. This is about Pelosi's statement. Please do not confuse this thread with Bush, Iraq War, Dick Cheney or whatsoever. This is about Pelosi and her credibility's at stake.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

:topic:

and I never said I'm on Panetta's side. Where did I say that? I wanted her to resign because she sucks - REREAD MY POSTS... not because she may or may have lied. It's separate issue. About CIA & Pelosi - see my last sentences in my post #149

No, this is not :topic:

The fact is you ANSWERED the thread creator´s question with the article for want her to resign.

I'm not sure why did you show me this but you just proved my point. Thank you.

from your article you just gave me -

I do not see anything that I support your point. All what you do is pasted ONE sentence of the whole article and also letter to Panetta. Where´s your answer to David R. Obey´s letter to Panetta?

 

[Hear Again]

In the previous adminstration, our commander in chief wasn't exactly known for being thruthful. As yet, there is no evidience that I know of against Pelosi so it's premature to accuse her of lying.

 

[Jiro]

No, this is not :topic:

How are tapes related to this thread??? OFF TOPIC!

The fact is you ANSWERED the thread creator´s question with the article for want her to resign.

yes. I want her to resign because of several reasons. I don't like her.

I do not see anything that I support your point. All what you do is pasted ONE sentence of the whole article and also letter to Panetta. Where´s your answer to David R. Obey´s letter to Panetta?

Please re-read the letter. It's just one LITTLE mistake that the report included a name of Appropriations staff who sat in the CIA briefing. Obey's just telling Panetta to remove that name from the report - a very minor correction.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

You misunderstood Reba's post. She does not know who you're talking about because the news she found contradicted with what you heard from news. Next time - post the source.

No, I understood her prefectly. I choose to listen the TV news over read any articles because the people who use their own words over articles. Yes, she know what I am talking about because I alway use those words in my posts since 2004 in debate threads. I´m sorry if you or Reba found contradicted what I learn from TV news. You know that TV world news, we watch is not censor.

It's possible that you misunderstood the news. Who knows? That's why it's best to post the source.

If you want to agree with me, fine BUT... Do NOT insult my intelligence that´s because you don´t like or twist the suggestion to belittle me for Reba. She KNEW very well that I use those words since 2004.

why not? I just read the article and it's nearly same as any news - ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, etc.

I only read 3 different articles because they are neutral and reliable.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

I see! so his companions.... are the one who authorized the torture.... so since Pelosi was the ranking member in House Intelligence Committee, she was briefed on enhanced interrogation techniques as reported from the link in your post #150. Since Pelosi did not register her objection, that means she must be one of Bush's companions.

No,

The fact is: Pelsoi has no power to authoritze the torture and don´t torture anyone.

The torture method was started before the Congress was briefed about them.

Re-read my post that the civillians who work for US Government, is not allow to spread out the "top secret" briefings to the public. Pelsoi did not break her rules for spread torture issues out to the public in 2003 because Bush was her boss.

You make no sense that Pespoi is one of Bush´s companians because she know about torture issues. The fact is the torture issues was decided by BUSH ADMINISTRATION, not Congress.

This is not about if harsh interrogation was used or not. This is about Pelosi's statement. Please do not confuse this thread with Bush, Iraq War, Dick Cheney or whatsoever. This is about Pelosi and her credibility's at stake.

Yes it is about harsh interrogration because Nancy felt that she was being mislead by CIA. She only answered what she remember.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

How are tapes related to this thread??? OFF TOPIC!

No, this is not :topic: but it is about truth. Accord Reba´s question in her first thread. I explained why I doubt Panetta´s rebuttal. Panetta KNEW that his people destoryed the memos, tapes, etc. and easy for him to rebut Nancy´s word? That´s why I doubt his claim.

yes. I want her to resign because of several reasons. I don't like her.

Oh I see, I thought you answered Reba´s question because its about the article, she created.

I can see that you made :topic: here for want her to resign because you don´t like her for different reasons than Reba´s article here.

Please re-read the letter. It's just one LITTLE mistake that the report included a name of Appropriations staff who sat in the CIA briefing. Obey's just telling Panetta to remove that name from the report - a very minor correction.

Okay, no matter either it´s minor or huge correction but he should be careful and think twice before he say something to the public.

 

[Jiro]

:roll:

 

[Hear Again]

This thread is several pages long yet I see that no one has provided any evidence of the accusations presented in the article Reba posted.

 

[Jiro]

This thread is several pages long yet I see that no one has provided any evidence of the accusations presented in the article Reba posted.

how exactly is that possible? The investigation's on-going. The best we can do is show the record. Liebling already showed the link of letter which stated that Pelosi has attended CIA briefings (which as a contradiction to Pelosi's post)

Lastly, Pelosi made a claim with no evidence.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

Obey's just telling Panetta to remove that name from the report - a very minor correction.

Another errors.

More errors in CIA interrogation briefing list
Problems surface as lawmakers probe who knew what about torture

updated 7:05 p.m. ET May 20, 2009

WASHINGTON - New questions surfaced Wednesday about the accuracy of a CIA document meant to settle who in Congress knew about severe interrogation methods approved by the Bush administration.

Three new errors appeared to emerge in the CIA's matrix of 40 congressional briefings on so-called enhanced interrogation techniques. Those techniques include waterboarding, a form of simulated drowning, which President Barack Obama has called torture.

The CIA acknowledged one of the errors but continued to stand by its version of events in the other two cases.

The briefing chart, widely leaked to the news media two weeks ago, was compiled by the CIA at the request of members of Congress after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi claimed in April that the CIA failed to tell her at a September 2002 briefing that waterboarding had been used against a prisoner.

That briefing occurred within weeks of the waterboarding of terrorist suspect Abu Zubaydah. He was subjected to the procedure at least 83 times.

Pelosi a target of criticism
Pelosi has been a frequent target of criticism from Republicans who are eager to argue that Democrats knew about waterboarding and did little to stop it.

The CIA chart states that a Senate staffer, Chris Mellon, attended a briefing on July 15, 2004. However, Mellon told The Associated Press that he left the Senate in April 2004 and did not attend the briefing.

On Wednesday, CIA spokesman George Little said the CIA has reviewed its record and agrees that Mellon was erroneously listed as having attended the 2004 briefing.

"The briefing chart was prepared in response to requests from Congress," Little said. "The agency compiled it in good faith after reviewing our records from 2002 to 2009. We didn't release it publicly, nor have we hyped it, and we have been candid in describing it."

The CIA matrix also reported that Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.V., then the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, was briefed on Feb. 4, 2003. But it notes that Rockefeller received a "later individual briefing."

Rockefeller spokeswoman Jamie Smith said Wednesday that the senator was not briefed on the CIA interrogation program until Sept. 4, 2003.

Little said that "on the Rockefeller briefing, the chart plainly indicates that he wasn't there and was to be briefed individually later. That's in fact what our records show. The chart makes no claim as to if or when that briefing occurred."

'Our records are detailed. They are mistaken'
The CIA chart also shows former House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Porter Goss attended a March 8, 2005, briefing as a member of Congress. However, Goss was at that time the director of the CIA. He took that job in November 2004.

"On the March 8, 2005, briefing, we were true to the records," Little said. "Although Mr. Goss was CIA director at that time, the underlying records list him as chairman of the House Intelligence Committee. There's a record of an earlier briefing that lists Rep. (Pete) Hoekstra as chairman."

On Tuesday, House Appropriations Chairman Rep. David Obey, D-Ohio, said that one of his committee staff members was erroneously listed as attending a briefing in September 2006. The CIA stands by its record on that count.

Obey's spokeswoman, Kirstin Brost, said the CIA was wrong.

"Our records are clear. Our records are detailed. They are mistaken," she said.

The CIA cobbled together the chart from notes, memo and recollections because transcripts of the meetings were not kept. It was sent to Capitol Hill on May 6.

CIA Director Leon Panetta acknowledged in a May 6 letter to House Intelligence Committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes, D-Texas, that the CIA's list may not be completely accurate.

"In the end, you and the committee will have to determine whether this information is an accurate summary of what actually happened," Panetta wrote.

More errors in CIA interrogation briefing list - Capitol Hill- msnbc.com

Do you want to say that it´s also very minor correction as well?

The article I posted is not :topic: but its about Nancy.

That´s why I doubt Panetta´s rebut in my first post #27...

And like what I responsed Reba´s post few hours ago that Nancy & Panetta remember differently.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

how exactly is that possible? The investigation's on-going. The best we can do is show the record. Liebling already showed the link of letter which stated that Pelosi has attended CIA briefings (which as a contradiction to Pelosi's post)

Lastly, Pelosi made a claim with no evidence.

Sorry, I fail to see any logic in your arguments here.

 

[Liebling:-)))]

It look like that the people think the CIA never lies or makes mistakes?

 

[Jiro]

It look like that the people think the CIA never lies or makes mistakes?

Plausible Deniability to public is one thing (and I don't care).... but lying to President of United States????

:-o

 

[Jiro]

No, this is not :topic: but it is about truth. Accord Reba´s question in her first thread. I explained why I doubt Panetta´s rebuttal. Panetta KNEW that his people destoryed the memos, tapes, etc. and easy for him to rebut Nancy´s word? That´s why I doubt his claim.

Your statements are FALSE. WRONG.
CORRECTION - The contents which were destroyed occurred under Bush Administration by different CIA Director named Hayden.

In case you didn't know, Panetta was nominated by Obama. Are you telling me that you believe Pelosi over Panetta - a man who Obama PERSONALLY picked? Are you telling me Obama picked a liar?