Bird Strike Prevention
How the Air Force prevents bird strikes.
from grouchyoldcripple
Posted on 05/13/2009 5:12:56 PM PDT by jazusamo
Some of the most vehement critics of so-called “enhanced interrogation techniques” are standing behind House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), despite accusations that she didn’t speak up forcefully enough when she first learned of them.
“The information she was given was minimal, maybe not even accurate,” said Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-N.Y.). “She wasn’t in the majority in 2002. George W. Bush was the president.”
Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.), a Judiciary subcommittee chairman who has pushed for sanctions against Justice Department lawyers who approved techniques such as waterboarding, says the important question is what the executive branch did to detainees. The rest, he said, is a diversion.
“No one says Nancy Pelosi authorized torture,” Nadler said. “It’s like a kid saying, ‘Well, she did it too.’ Well, she didn’t do it.”
Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-Calif.), co-chairwoman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said that Pelosi was being “super-careful.”
“I’ve always known Nancy to not mix her responsibilities with her public image,” Woolsey said.
Hinchey, Nadler and Woolsey hail from the left wing of the Democratic Caucus, as does Pelosi. But the left has not always been supportive of how Pelosi has handled Bush intelligence practices, such as warrantless wiretapping, and some liberal groups are not happy with revelations of how Pelosi handled the interrogation issue in 2002 and 2003.
Other members of the Progressive Caucus were more cautious Wednesday. Asked about how Pelosi handled the revelations of the administration’s interrogation program in 2002 and 2003, Reps. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) and Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) declined to comment.
“I have no knowledge of what happened back then,” said Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.), walking into the House chamber.
Republicans, seeking to stave off investigations into the Bush administration officials who authorized the interrogation techniques that President Obama has deemed “torture,” have sought to turn the tables on Pelosi.
They say she received briefings from intelligence officials in September 2002 on techniques used against terrorism suspects like Abu Zubaydah, who was waterboarded. CIA documents released at the request of congressional Republicans show that one of her aides was briefed specifically on waterboarding in February 2003.
Pelosi maintains that she was never told detainees were being waterboarded, even though the practice began in August 2002. She has said she concurred in a protest after the 2003 briefing, but the practice continued for at least a month afterward.
Democrats also stress that they passed legislation in the House banning torture shortly after they took control of Congress in 2007.
Republicans turned up the heat Wednesday when Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) threatened to try to call Pelosi as a witness in the Senate investigation of the interrogation program.
Members of those groups that have battled to expose the Bush administration’s interrogation practices have a mixed view of how Pelosi handled the briefings that addressed enhanced interrogation techniques. But it hasn’t persuaded them to back off on their call for independent investigation into Bush’s interrogation policies.
Vincent Warren, executive director of the Center for Constitutional Rights, said it looks like Pelosi “knuckled under to national security” and accepted Bush administration explanations.
“I’m deeply disappointed to learn that Nancy Pelosi knew about what was going on at a time when Congress would have been in a position to do something about it,” Warren said. “During the Bush administration, Democrats were uniformly weak on recognizing legitimate human rights issues wrapped up in national security.”
But the American Civil Liberties Union’s Caroline Fredrickson was more hesitant to criticize Pelosi’s handling of the situation, saying the available information has been distorted by partisan sniping.
“We don’t know what version of the briefing they were given,” said Fredrickson, director of the ACLU’s Washington Legislative Office. “That’s why we need an independent investigation by a special counsel.”
The Center for Constitutional Rights wants both a criminal prosecution and a “truth commission” to investigate the interrogation policies.
Democratic members say nothing would have been able to stop the Bush administration.
Rep. Neil Abercrombie (D-Hawaii) said it’s an ongoing, unresolved question regarding what lawmakers can do with the information they receive.
“There have been heated exchanges in those briefings about what was being done, including torture and other issues,” said Abercrombie, who has gotten briefings as a member of the House Armed Services Committee. “We are under strict legal sanction. This issue goes back as far as the Pentagon Papers. We’ve never resolved it.”
Marxism 101.
Who are you going to believe? The “blood-sucking lawyers” or the Liberals?
Just like they did for the rapist during all the Monica/Paula news. These people are ultra left wing statists. That is their only interest. The rest is window dressing to hide their agendas.
Marxists, all of them.
It’s amazing that the Speaker holds this much power over the others in her party that they would go to these lengths to rationalize her actions and excuse her obfuscation.
SanFranNan should resign immediately. Her actions in this matter have been smarmy and sleazy...all in the interest of preserving her precious public persona.
Madam Speaker, we already know who you really are. You can stop the charade, now.
When an issue threatens their power?
They will do what they need to do to protect their POWER!
Issues are a tool, not a goal.
We need to sensationalize, personalize, and polarize Nancy Pelosi every step of the way. Barack and Reid too. We keep the pressure, we just might have a shot in 2010.
Gee, the whores are sticking up for the madam. Why am I not surprised.
This is the same BS we got on weapons of mass destruction after invading Iraq. “We did not know, we were not told the truth, we .... blah, blah, blah”
If their lips are moving, they are lying!!!
Yes, it’s the same old game plan, lie and lie some more.
Nancy Pelosi is a serial liar and no friend of national security.
““The information she was given was minimal, maybe not even accurate,” said Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-N.Y.).”
Hinchey is a particularly nasty cuss. Maurice..what else is there to say?
You have to admit that at least they show loyalty, whereas Republicans would be moving heaven and earth to distance themselves, even if the charges are bogus (which they are not in the case.)
Republicans turned up the heat Wednesday when Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) threatened to try to call Pelosi as a witness in the Senate investigation of the interrogation program.
Threatened? Can she be called or not?
I think your the only one who gets it.
Power is what drives this so called party. Nothing gets in the way of it.
Examples:
Clinton - I did not have sex with that women. No shame- rats did not care a bit. He looked into the camera an lied, they loved his perversion , it was only a....
Nancy - I never saw or knew anything. No shame again. She looked into the camera and lied . She is starting to remember, its evolving, she wasn’t in the majority, and she didn’t do it. Bla Bla -Bla.
Don’t think for a minute rats care a wit about the country. It’s only get the money, an control. Our guys fu^ked us! Its start all over again
I believe she can be called before the Senate Judiciary Committee if the Dems start an investigation and start calling other witnesses before the committee.
I think Graham spoke out to let the Dems know he’d do it as a preemptive strike to stop any investigation.
““The information she was given was minimal, maybe not even accurate,” said Rep. Maurice Hinchey (D-N.Y.).”
And how the heck would Maurice know?
Those briefings were confidential I thought.
Hey...as long as she’s got a (D) by her name, she could murder kids and these nutjobs would look the other way.
A Statement from the Speaker of the House
To Whom It May Concern:
In recent weeks I have stated that I was never briefed, nor had any prior knowledge of, the use of so-called “enhanced interrogation techniques” on detainees by U.S. interrogators. Today, the Central Intelligence Agency released documents indicating they had briefed me on the use of these techniques in September 2002. Having no personal recollection of this meeting, I directed my clerical staff to retrieve meeting notes for the date in question.
After a thorough review of these notes, it appears I was unaware this meeting was with the Central Intelligence Agency. Instead I was under the impression that it was a coffee chat with Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, an important constituent group from my home district. In their description of waterboarding, fuzzy caterpillars, etc., I simply assumed they were speaking of new Castro District trends in sexual foreplay. Had I known the real truth — that they were describing the grim tools of a sadistic torture regime beyond the worst imaginings of Mengele himself — I would have vigorously objected, and would have never cheerfully told my briefers, “play safely!”
I am sorry for any confusion my earlier statements might have caused, and I hope this clarification puts the matter to rest. For future reference, please direct inquiries regarding torture issues within the California 8th District B&D community to my outreach coordinator Julian Julian Julian. All other torture-related issues should be directed to my National Security and Drag Queen Affairs Advisor, Lady Marmalade.
Sincerely,
Nancy Pelosi
Speaker of the House of Representatives
More at: http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk/2009/05/a-statement-from-the-speaker-of-the-house.html
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.