• commentary
  • MONDAY DECEMBER 10 2007 9:00 AM

Pelosi Is A Worthless, Compromised Piece Of Shit

Submitted by FearTheReaper

Edited by erin_broadley

Tags: Nancy Pelosi, Bush, Torture, Illegal Wiretapping



Get Nancy Pelosi the fuck out of her leadership role as Speaker of the House. The woman is supposed to be battling George Bush on basic issues like torture, but she is totally complicit in the administration’s activities. She has known about them for a long, long time and to take any action would force her to reveal her acceptance of the administration's bullshit.


Two senior Republicans and Democrats in Congress -- including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi -- were briefing on the CIA's program to use waterboarding on terror suspects in September 2002 and did not object.


Oh, good. She should really get to the bottom of the situation then. I mean, why wouldn't she want to expose the fact that she knew about illegal activities in 2002?

That was the year Nancy, Rep. Jane Harman, Sen. Bob Graham, Sen. John Rockefeller IV, Rep. Porter Goss and Sen. Pat Roberts were told all about the CIA program to “wring vial information” out of suspects who didn’t want to give it up. They were given a virtual tour of detention sites and interrogation techniques. And Nancy said nothing. Being one of only a few Democrats who actually knew about the practice, one might come to the conclusion that she has no place being the leader of the House of Representatives because she is compromised on an act that was illegal under the Geneva Conventions.


Among the techniques described, said two officials present, was waterboarding, a practice that years later would be condemned as torture by Democrats and some Republicans on Capitol Hill. But on that day, no objections were raised. Instead, at least two lawmakers in the room asked the CIA to push harder, two U.S. officials said.


I’m not going to say that the Democrats asked the CIA to push harder. Goss eventually was put in charge of the CIA, so you can be pretty sure he was one of the two who wanted the prisoners to get staple enemas.

Only one Democrat objected to the torture: Jane Harmon, who was at that point the second ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee. Harmon sent a classified letter to the CIA to officially protest the program. She was not allowed to publicly discuss the program.


"When you serve on intelligence committee you sign a second oath -- one of secrecy," she said. "I was briefed, but the information was closely held to just the Gang of Four. I was not free to disclose anything."


Harmon’s actions now shed light on a strange move by Nancy Pelosi when she took over as Speaker. Harmon was supposed to be picked to lead the House Intelligence Committee, but Pelosi gave the job to someone else. Considering Harmon was the only one who sent a letter to the CIA objecting, it is an interesting move by Pelosi.

This is not the first time Pelosi’s judgment has been questioned. When the New York Times exposed the administration’s illegal wiretapping programs, Alberto Gonzales let this little gem slip.


This is not a backdoor approach. We believe Congress has authorized this kind of surveillance. We have had discussions with Congress in the past--certain members of Congress--as to whether or not FISA could be amended to allow us to adequately deal with this kind of threat, and we were advised that that would be difficult, if not impossible.


Hmm. “Certain members of Congress.” Considering Pelosi’s leadership role, it would be very surprising if she was not one of those who informed. She was part of the “Gang of Four.”

These circumstances make a good case for removing Pelosi from her leadership role. If she is unwilling to go after the administration because she does not want to expose her own complicity, then it is a major problem. With what is going on now, the person in charge needs to be clean on the issues.


I have said it before and I will say it again: Impeachment is off the table.


- Nancy Pelosi

 

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

7 | 8 | 9

Next

Comments
TheFuckOffKid

TheFuckOffKid

NEWSWIRE

Australia

DEC 15, 2007 03:27 AM

SirPsychoSexy said:

Ascanius said:

PointBlank said:

wadebrigade said:
what's with our gov co-opting the name 'gang of four?'


That is a name that has been co-opted more than the band's (another co-opter!) sound.


...

zoom image



That totally looks like a frame from "Reservoir Dogs II"



Condaleeza: "I don't wanna be Mr Pink!"

TheFuckOffKid

TheFuckOffKid

NEWSWIRE

Australia

DEC 15, 2007 03:31 AM

goatinamoat said:

Zarth said:
[America: If You Don't Like Your Freedom, We'll Shoot You In The Head a little better, though.


I am thinking you would like this better "America: Do what you like to us. We have gone so soft we are willing to be wiped off the map by anyone with a backbone."



"America, Where Torture Stops Bad Things From Happening."

wereduck

wereduck

I'm lost
July 2007

DEC 15, 2007 05:07 AM

goatinamoat said:

Zarth said:
[America: If You Don't Like Your Freedom, We'll Shoot You In The Head a little better, though.


I am thinking you would like this better "America: Do what you like to us. We have gone so soft we are willing to be wiped off the map by anyone with a backbone."



I'll go two better than you: "America: Hey, You're Brown, So You Probably Deserve It" and "America: Because at This Point, We Deserve To Be Wiped Off the Map".

I like it so very much when people say this as well:


No, we have people who would rather we just rollover regardless of what others do to us.



Ooh, implying that, because people don't support torture, that America has "gone soft" or will "roll over" at the first sign of trouble. Very clever. Except, if that were the case, why are people even debating this topic, then? If these people were so "soft", then why the fuck would they spend any amount of time debating you or anyone else? Why would people protest this? If they were so soft, they would back down the moment that people like you criticized them for being "un-American." But they don't.

Remember kids: Having principles=Rolling over=Terrorist. Great message, goatboy.

wereduck

wereduck

I'm lost
July 2007

DEC 15, 2007 05:08 AM

TheFuckOffKid said:

goatinamoat said:

Zarth said:
[America: If You Don't Like Your Freedom, We'll Shoot You In The Head a little better, though.


I am thinking you would like this better "America: Do what you like to us. We have gone so soft we are willing to be wiped off the map by anyone with a backbone."



"America, Where Torture Stops Bad Things From Happening."



Welcome to the United States of Jack Bauer.

Zarth

zarth

Seattle, WA
December 2004

DEC 15, 2007 06:11 AM

goatinamoat said:

Zarth said:
America: If You Don't Like Your Freedom, We'll Shoot You In The Head a little better, though.


I am thinking you would like this better "America: Do what you like to us. We have gone so soft we are willing to be wiped off the map by anyone with a backbone."


If you seriously believe that our only choice is between torturing people and being destroyed, then I pity you, living in that kind of primitive unreasoning fear, which has apparently demolished not only your moral compass but your intellective capacities, as well. Maybe the Wizard of Oz can help you with your courage. And your brain. And your heart.

wereduck

wereduck

I'm lost
July 2007

DEC 15, 2007 06:34 AM

SirPsychoSexy said:

KUNGFOO said:

Gillionaire said:
I desperately crave progress in our nations politics, but politicians do everything they can it seems to keep us stuck in this rut we're in. I makes me sad. frown



It's hard to say what exactly is the root cause of our current political reality, at least in terms of party representation. Unfortunately, the situation appears to be stuck in a fuzzy, nationalistic gray area.

I think I've been able to visualize it, (albeit quite simply) here:

zoom image





Proof that kittens are smarter than humans.

goatinamoat

goatinamoat

New York, NY
March 2006

DEC 15, 2007 11:32 AM

we3_pirate said:
If they were so soft, they would back down the moment that people like you criticized them for being "un-American." But they don't.
Remember kids: Having principles=Rolling over=Terrorist. Great message, goatboy.


It's clear that people like Zarth have principles. Who said otherwise? And for that matter, where did I say _anyone_ here was un-American??!!! I am debating the merits of what I consider to be possible torture, i.e., waterboarding. No one's talking about lopping off body parts, killing hostages, or whatever else is fashionable in the Middle East.

I am saying that hard, terrible choices sometimes have to be made. Especially if there is a situation where we are trying to take preventative action.

If you want to continue the argument in terms of questions like "When did you stop beating your wife"....well, knock yourself out.

goatinamoat

goatinamoat

New York, NY
March 2006

DEC 15, 2007 11:34 AM

Still seems applicable to me --> http://suicidegirls.com/boards/Current+Events/18244/

Just my opinion.

wereduck

wereduck

I'm lost
July 2007

DEC 15, 2007 11:47 AM

goatinamoat said:

we3_pirate said:
If they were so soft, they would back down the moment that people like you criticized them for being "un-American." But they don't.
Remember kids: Having principles=Rolling over=Terrorist. Great message, goatboy.


It's clear that people like Zarth have principles. Who said otherwise? And for that matter, where did I say _anyone_ here was un-American??!!! I am debating the merits of what I consider to be possible torture, i.e., waterboarding. No one's talking about lopping off body parts, killing hostages, or whatever else is fashionable in the Middle East.

I am saying that hard, terrible choices sometimes have to be made. Especially if there is a situation where we are trying to take preventative action.

If you want to continue the argument in terms of questions like "When did you stop beating your wife"....well, knock yourself out.



Except it has all ready been proven that these terrible choices yield no results. So, there's no discernable reason why it should be done.

And I wasn't saying you were saying no one had principles. Read that again, carefully: I said:


Remember kids: Having principles=Rolling over=Terrorist.



Which was in reply to this statement that you made:


No, we have people who would rather we just rollover regardless of what others do to us.



Which reads like you're saying that standing by our principles, and speaking out against torture, is somehow "roll[ing] over, regardless of what others do to us." Which is not exactly, how shall I say, smart.

And I might as well take myself up on your offer to knock myself out, because that would be a hell of a lot more productive than reading over-and-over your one point about taking "preventative action," which has been refuted several times over the last few pages.

Previous

PAGE: 

1 ... 

7 | 8 | 9

Next

featured interviews