(05/12/09) "Pelosi the Enabler" (Truthdig)

[Spang]

Nancy Pelosi is no Dick Cheney, nor a George W. Bush. She was neither the author of a systematic policy of torture nor has she been, like Cheney and most top Republicans in Congress, an enduring apologist for its practice. It is a nonsensical distraction to place her failure to speak out courageously as a critic of the Bush policies on the same level as those who engineered one of the most shameful debacles in U.S. history.

But what she, and anyone else who went along with this evil, as lackadaisically as she now claims, should be confronted with are the serious implications of their passive acquiescence. Why did she not speak up, or if it were a matter of a lack of reliable information, demand an accounting from the executive branch, as befits a leader of the loyal opposition in Congress?

If the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, and later House Democratic leader, lacked the authority to publicly question a policy of torture, then how can we condemn, indeed imprison, ordinary soldiers who thought it their duty to follow orders?

Even though Abu Zubaydah had been waterboarded 83 times before the September 2002 briefing of Pelosi, she now claims she was told only that the practice might be used and that it had been approved by the Bush Justice Department as legal. Wasn’t that approval in itself sufficiently alarming to justify a strong and public dissent? Certainly that would have been the appropriate response when Pelosi aide Michael Sheehy, along with Rep. Jane Harman, D-Calif., were informed by the CIA in no uncertain terms five months later that Zubaydah had been subjected to specific “enhanced” methods including waterboarding. Pelosi admits to possessing that information, but according to one of her aides quoted in Politico, after Harman’s letter questioning the practice received “no response” from the CIA, “there was nothing more that could be done.”

Why not? Does the CIA or the White House that directs its activities stand above the law without any congressional restraint, as mandated by the U. S. Constitution that Pelosi has sworn to uphold?

Should the members of the 9/11 Presidential Commission not have been informed that two of the “key witnesses” upon whom their report was based had provided the information critical to the report’s conclusions only after being waterboarded a total of 266 times? On Page 146 of that report, there appears a boxed disclaimer that even the commissioners, possessed of high security clearances, were not allowed to meet, let alone cross-examine, the witnesses or even talk with those who did the interrogations.

As the presidential commissioners conceded in their report, “We submitted questions for use in the interrogations, but had no control over whether, when or how questions of particular interest would be asked. Nor were we allowed to talk to the interrogators so that we could better judge the credibility of the detainees and clarify ambiguities in the reporting.”

In short, the basic narrative of the origins and conduct of the 9/11 attack that so fundamentally perverted American politics relied on cherry-picked information that the White House and its operative in the field chose to release to the commission. As a result, we the public still know nothing of certainty about the financing of the terrorist organization emanating from Saudi Arabia and the UAE or the logistical support supplied to the Taliban and al-Qaida by agencies of the government of Pakistan.

What the public was offered was not an unvarnished look at the available evidence concerning the attack but rather a fear campaign justifying an undifferentiated and illogically constructed international war on terror. As Steve Elmendorf, chief of staff to Rep. Dick Gephardt, D-Mo., the Democratic leader following 9/11, put it: “You have to remember, in the 2002 period, the whole atmospherics, it was all about scaring people every day.”

That fear-mongering drove a majority of Democrats to support the president in his invasion of Iraq, the one Arab nation where al-Qaida had been most brutally oppressed by its sworn enemy, Saddam Hussein, who had nothing to do with the 9/11 attack. The “key witnesses” affirmed that reality even after being subjected to torture, which would have proven deeply embarrassing to the Bush administration were it revealed in open court proceedings.

By acquiescing to the cover-up of unpleasant truths in the treatment of prisoners, Pelosi contributed to the betrayal of the ideal of public accountability that is the bedrock of our system of governance, which Congress is charged with protecting.

The Source (http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20090513_pelosi_the_enabler/)

[lanney]

Pelosi is on drip drip drip drip mode. :laughing:

[Ikasu]

If the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, and later House Democratic leader, lacked the authority to publicly question a policy of torture, then how can we condemn, indeed imprison, ordinary soldiers who thought it their duty to follow orders?

Good question.

[sojourner]

Quote:If the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, and later House Democratic leader, lacked the authority to publicly question a policy of torture, then how can we condemn, indeed imprison, ordinary soldiers who thought it their duty to follow orders?

She certainly has that authority. That isn’t the issue. The issue is that she was briefed by the CIA on their interrogation techniques and said nothing until it was politically expedient to do so and then lied about her prior knowledge of them.

[Horizon]

Quote:If the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, and later House Democratic leader, lacked the authority to publicly question a policy of torture, then how can we condemn, indeed imprison, ordinary soldiers who thought it their duty to follow orders?

She certainly has that authority. That isn’t the issue. The issue is that she was briefed by the CIA on their interrogation techniques and said nothing until it was politically expedient to do so and then lied about her prior knowledge of them.

I never trusted her. She looks like an aging weasel.
And I agree with your explanation.

[Brooke]

Dear god I cannot stand this woman. I did this thing on Facebook, "Top 5 people you want to punch in the face", she was my #3 behind Dick Cheney and Bibi Netanyahu. :laughing:

I heard her yesterday, she couldn't even get her notes organized. I think she has some sort of mental issue, she just never appears all "there". I'm not saying it to make fun, I'm serious. My mom has worked in psych all her life and some of that observational stuff I inherited and I'm pretty good at noticing things. Something is wrong with Pelosi. Or maybe she's on something. I don't know.

[lanney]

My mom has worked in psych all her life and some of that observational stuff I inherited and I'm pretty good at noticing things. Something is wrong with Pelosi. Or maybe she's on something. I don't know.

It happens after long use of Botox. :D

[Brooke]

It happens after long use of Botox. :D

Or that. :laughing:

[Spang]

If she's using Botox, it ain't working.

[Suzan]

Lots of predictions flying around that Nancy's days are numbered, that she should never have taken on the CIA.

[lanney]

http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0509/Panetta_to_CIA_employees_We_told_Pelosi_the_truth. html?showall

Panetta to CIA employees: We told Pelosi the truthHis message: We didn't mislead Congress; stay focused on your job.

Panetta's note was sent to reporters via the CIA press office. Here's the key graph:

"Let me be clear: It is not our policy or practice to mislead Congress. That is against our laws and our values. As the Agency indicated previously in response to Congressional inquiries, our contemporaneous records from September 2002 indicate that CIA officers briefed truthfully on the interrogation of Abu Zubaydah, describing “the enhanced techniques that had been employed.” Ultimately, it is up to Congress to evaluate all the evidence and reach its own conclusions about what happened."

[Brooke]

Lots of predictions flying around that Nancy's days are numbered, that she should never have taken on the CIA.

I would throw a party. Seriously.

[mavfin]

I would throw a party. Seriously.

genericstamp!

IMO, she's far worse for the country than Mr. Flip-Flop, and you know how I feel about him. :-bd

[Laura Cereta]

It happens after long use of Botox. :D

I believe there are a lot of things concerning Pelosi to take issue with. In fact, the list is so long I wouldn't even know where to start. Making fun of her physical appearance, though, or her "beauty" choices is no better in my eyes then when it's done to Hillary. I believe if we want female politicians to be treated with respect and judged on the issues then we have to lead by example.

[Brooke]

I believe there are a lot of things concerning Pelosi to take issue with. In fact, the list is so long I wouldn't even know where to start. Making fun of her physical appearance, though, or her "beauty" choices is no better in my eyes then when it's done to Hillary. I believe if we want female politicians to be treated with respect and judged on the issues then we have to lead by example.

Good grief, Laura. You have such a thin skin and take things so personally. I didn't make the joke, but really, it's just a joke. And she does use Botox so really, I don't see the harm in it.

I haven't made fun of her botox usage, or her physical appearance. However, she does look like she's "off" all the time. It's just her mannerisms. Some people may joke it's too much botox, I just think she has something wrong with her, that has nothing to do with her facial features. But when you watch or listen to her, she's not all "there" and she kind of twitches. I'm not making fun, it's just an observation. My issues with her have nothing to do with her physical appearance.

Besides, people make fun of Obama's big ears. Do you take offense to that or is that okay because he's not a woman? I see men degraded for their physical appearance all the time. It's not any more acceptable because they're men. You argue for female equality, yet you seem to want them to get a free pass on the teasing simply because they're women. People make fun of famous people, regardless of gender.

[WASTRIC]

I agree CF, all during the campain (well the campain is still going on, but I mean before Nov. 08 ) Biden was always being called out about his hairplugs , Mc Cain about the scars from his facial surgery and his physical limitations from his POW days, O about his ears, Hillary about her pantsuits among other things. The problem comes when its the only reason you bash someone, there are plenty of reasons to bash Pelosi besides the way she looks.

[Meg]

I would throw a party. Seriously.

I will join you on that one! :thumbsup:

[Spang]

Who would take her place?

[Horizon]

Who would take her place?

It could be Gumby for all I care, anyone would be an improvement.
IMHO, I think she is unstable. Really, I do.

[Ikasu]

Who would take her place?

Probably Majority Leader Steny Hoyer.

[Spang]

Probably Majority Leader Steny Hoyer.

He's pro-choice and supports gay rights. He could be decent.

[Laura Cereta]

Good grief, Laura. You have such a thin skin and take things so personally. I didn't make the joke, but really, it's just a joke. And she does use Botox so really, I don't see the harm in it.

I haven't made fun of her botox usage, or her physical appearance. However, she does look like she's "off" all the time. It's just her mannerisms. Some people may joke it's too much botox, I just think she has something wrong with her, that has nothing to do with her facial features. But when you watch or listen to her, she's not all "there" and she kind of twitches. I'm not making fun, it's just an observation. My issues with her have nothing to do with her physical appearance.

Besides, people make fun of Obama's big ears. Do you take offense to that or is that okay because he's not a woman? I see men degraded for their physical appearance all the time. It's not any more acceptable because they're men. You argue for female equality, yet you seem to want them to get a free pass on the teasing simply because they're women. People make fun of famous people, regardless of gender.

I quoted Lanney's post and never referred to anyone specifically in my response. I take things personally? You're entitled to your opinion, but you jumped in with a defense before even being indicted. Conscience bothering you? I can assure you I am NOT thin skinned. I stand by my post, however. Comments about Pelosi's botox are no better then ones about Hillary's ankles. It's just not a relevant issue. Oh, and of all the criticism's I've made of Obama, you will find NONE concerning his personal appearance-- ears, clothes, whatever.

[Spang]

What's wrong with Hillary's ankles?

[Ikasu]

What's wrong with Hillary's ankles?

A lot of people say they're fat.

[Meg]

A lot of people say they're fat.

I guess I'm one of the few people who really doesn't notice. And I've seen FAT ankles!:eek:

[Spang]

A lot of people say they're fat.

I've never heard that before.

[CGP]

I think Nancy is in deep water (pardon the pun) over this waterboarding fiasco...

[CGP]

I believe there are a lot of things concerning Pelosi to take issue with. In fact, the list is so long I wouldn't even know where to start. Making fun of her physical appearance, though, or her "beauty" choices is no better in my eyes then when it's done to Hillary. I believe if we want female politicians to be treated with respect and judged on the issues then we have to lead by example.

I think NP is actually very stylish and attractive.

[Horizon]

I think Nancy is in deep water (pardon the pun) over this waterboarding fiasco...

Murr made a funny.X_X

I dont think she will be able to get out of this one at all.

[smiledr]

I think NP is actually very stylish and attractive.

I agree.

[Brooke]

I quoted Lanney's post and never referred to anyone specifically in my response. I take things personally? You're entitled to your opinion, but you jumped in with a defense before even being indicted. Conscience bothering you? I can assure you I am NOT thin skinned. I stand by my post, however. Comments about Pelosi's botox are no better then ones about Hillary's ankles. It's just not a relevant issue. Oh, and of all the criticism's I've made of Obama, you will find NONE concerning his personal appearance-- ears, clothes, whatever.

I knew you weren't responding to my post, but I wanted to comment on it anyway. Excuse me.

And maybe I'm just not very observant sometimes but I've never heard comments about Hillary's ankles.

You're right, Nancy's botox isn't a relevant issue, but you're making a federal case out of it when it isn't.

[RE:]

Who would take her place?Isn't Hillary 4th in line under Nancy?:thinking:

[foxyladi]

Good question.

hillarystamp!:e4:

[Brooke]

Steny Hoyer would most likely take her place.

[lanney]

I believe there are a lot of things concerning Pelosi to take issue with. In fact, the list is so long I wouldn't even know where to start. Making fun of her physical appearance, though, or her "beauty" choices is no better in my eyes then when it's done to Hillary. I believe if we want female politicians to be treated with respect and judged on the issues then we have to lead by example.
Take it easy, it is a joke on her not her looks. She looks much younger. I will make Plastic surgeons very rich. Any idea, who is her Surgeon? I need help.
Her face is expression less, same is her politically maneuvering, and fully impacted by Botox. She is very manipulative, and that is why she is very successful politician. Good for her.
I think she should resign but she is very powerful and may not happen. She was behind Hillary defeat.

she's not all "there" and she kind of twitches
Serious note - I think she had done lot of work on her face, may be too much of Botox or face lift surgery.

[devildog]

If the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, and later House Democratic leader, lacked the authority to publicly question a policy of torture, then how can we condemn, indeed imprison, ordinary soldiers who thought it their duty to follow orders?

OUTSTANDING question. Remember Lindy Englund and the rest of her cohorts from Abu Ghraib? Leadership doesn't start from the bottom up.

[Laura Cereta]

I knew you weren't responding to my post, but I wanted to comment on it anyway. Excuse me.

And maybe I'm just not very observant sometimes but I've never heard comments about Hillary's ankles.

You're right, Nancy's botox isn't a relevant issue, but you're making a federal case out of it when it isn't.

I'm sorry you had a bad week.

[Laura Cereta]

Take it easy, it is a joke on her not her looks. She looks much younger. I will make Plastic surgeons very rich. Any idea, who is her Surgeon? I need help.
Her face is expression less, same is her politically maneuvering, and fully impacted by Botox. She is very manipulative, and that is why she is very successful politician. Good for her.
I think she should resign but she is very powerful and may not happen. She was behind Hillary defeat.


Serious note - I think she had done lot of work on her face, may be too much of Botox or face lift surgery.

Yeah, she donated thousands of dollars to the political campaigns of representatives whose districts Hillary had won by a large margin. Coincidentally, they all pledged their "super" vote to Obama. It was ugly.

She does seem out of touch with reality some times. I think she sincerely buys her own dishonesty.

A friend of mine was commenting on his own attempts to self-delude and he said, "I only have two brain cells left-- one is selling shit and the other is buying it." :D

Back to Pelosi and waterboarding: she didn't seem to convince too many people with that press conference. I would say that calling the CIA liars is not going to work out well in the long run for her.

[Laura Cereta]

But what she, and anyone else who went along with this evil, as lackadaisically as she now claims, should be confronted with are the serious implications of their passive acquiescence. Why did she not speak up, or if it were a matter of a lack of reliable information, demand an accounting from the executive branch, as befits a leader of the loyal opposition in Congress?


For the same reason that Congress did absolutely NOTHING from '06-'08. They had an approval rating of like 17%.

[Spang]

YouTube

[Laura Cereta]

Thank you for the video, Spang. :) Though I am quite contemptuous of Media Matters, in this particular video, they make an excellent point. The things said by Rush and others are despicable. Would this be happening if Pelosi was a man? Sure, the media would attack her on the torture issue if she were male but would they do it by talking about plastic surgery?

This goes back to the point I was trying to make earlier in this thread. Although some people took offense to it, when we criticize NP about her face instead of her policies or her character, then we are acting just as disgustingly as those commentators who did it. Not only that, regardless of our intentions, we are feeding into the misogynist cultural attitude. Sometimes a joke is NOT just a joke, no matter how benign the intent.

[NativeSun]

Quote:If the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, and later House Democratic leader, lacked the authority to publicly question a policy of torture, then how can we condemn, indeed imprison, ordinary soldiers who thought it their duty to follow orders?

She certainly has that authority. That isn’t the issue. The issue is that she was briefed by the CIA on their interrogation techniques and said nothing until it was politically expedient to do so and then lied about her prior knowledge of them.

It's being reported today that right before the first elections in Iraq, the U.S. national security team was concerned about Iran's interference with the process and wanted to take preventive measures against them. When Pelosi learned of this, she supposedly called then NSA director Condoleeza Rice to voice her opposition to the suggestion. And the plans (whatever they were) did not go ahead. If this turns out to be true, then she could have done the same thing when she learned about waterboarding. But I can see her viewpoint than regaining control of the House and Senate someday in the future was the better course of action. :rolleyes:

Pelosi Lied. People Died.

[musgrrl]

Thank you for the video, Spang. :) Though I am quite contemptuous of Media Matters, in this particular video, they make an excellent point. The things said by Rush and others are despicable. Would this be happening if Pelosi was a man? Sure, the media would attack her on the torture issue if she were male but would they do it by talking about plastic surgery?

This goes back to the point I was trying to make earlier in this thread. Although some people took offense to it, when we criticize NP about her face instead of her policies or her character, then we are acting just as disgustingly as those commentators who did it. Not only that, regardless of our intentions, we are feeding into the misogynist cultural attitude. Sometimes a joke is NOT just a joke, no matter how benign the intent.

I agree that we can't have one standard for one person and one for another. I personally don't like Nancy Pelosi because I think she's a hack and I don't agree with her politically. As for her looks, I really don't think it's relevant to her performance and should be left out of the discussion.

[Brooke]

I'm sorry you had a bad week.

I've had a bad past 3 years actually..lol.

[Laura Cereta]

I've had a bad past 3 years actually..lol.

{{{ClintonFan}}}