Former CIA chief Goss: (via HotAir)
Today, I am slack-jawed to read that members claim to have not understood that the techniques on which they were briefed were to actually be employed; or that specific techniques such as “waterboarding” were never mentioned. It must be hard for most Americans of common sense to imagine how a member of Congress can forget being told about the interrogations of Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed. In that case, though, perhaps it is not amnesia but political expedience.
Let me be clear. It is my recollection that:
– The chairs and the ranking minority members of the House and Senate intelligence committees, known as the Gang of Four, were briefed that the CIA was holding and interrogating high-value terrorists.
– We understood what the CIA was doing.
– We gave the CIA our bipartisan support.
– We gave the CIA funding to carry out its activities.
– On a bipartisan basis, we asked if the CIA needed more support from Congress to carry out its mission against al-Qaeda.
I do not recall a single objection from my colleagues
Ok, now that we know that Pelosi (Madame Speaker, elected as leader by her fellow Democrats I might add) was fully aware of our interrogation techniques and never uttered a peep of objection to anyone, even privately as far as we can tell, I think it's time to call bull on the left's outrage unless they extend their outrage to their own leadership.
Like that's going to happen.
Because this was never about moral indignation. This was always about political theatre.
You will have to excuse me when I laugh every time a liberal says that we lost "our moral authority" with the interrogations. Maybe they should look up the word "moral" as they advocate abortion, pornography, gay marriage, and all assortment of things that might not be considered "moral."
*Had to add this. From the WSJ:
Yet last week Mr. Obama overruled the advice of his CIA director, Leon Panetta, and four prior CIA directors by releasing the details of the enhanced interrogation program. Former CIA director Michael Hayden has stated clearly that declassifying the memos will make it more difficult for the CIA to defend the nation.
Some might say THAT was immoral.
This is what happens when there is no basis for morality. It shifts with the wind, or in the case, the political wind.
As Noemie Emery points out here in a Townhall piece, Democrats always like to forget when they approved of things that they later see would do them better politically to be against.
We all remember the video of all the Democrats who demanded Saddam be removed and warned us of his ability and probability of having WMD's. I can't find the one we all saw a couple of years ago, but this video has the same lovely summary (including Madame Speaker).
The Democrats don't like to remember those statements about Iraq and Saddam listed in the video above. Because it shows their complete and utter hypocrisy on the issue. They knew without a doubt that Saddam was dangerous and was supportive of the President at the time of taking Saddam down.
This is clearly the same thing. I believe that Pelosi felt at the time of the interrogations, that what we were doing was needed to keep our country safe. Agree or disagree with that, it doesn't matter. Pelosi was a part of it. The trumped up outrage is nothing more than drama put out there to paint a false picture of the reality at the time.
If the left want to see Bush punished for what he did to keep us safe after 9-11, then Pelosi and all those who knew about the interrogations would have to punished as well. When I see the left calling for that, then they might have some credibility.
Noemie has this thought as well:
Let's get at the truth, not merely about the administration before this one, but of all of the ones that came before that. If we prosecute people in government who try to save American lives by doing "harsh" things to America's enemies, why should we stop at 2001? There's President Truman, who dropped two atomic bombs on Japan, killing and injuring tens of thousands of innocent people. Impeach him in retrospect, for the women and children. Talk about harsh. Go back before him, and impeach FDR: Without him, there would have been no Manhattan Project, specifically conceived to be "harsh" on the enemy
You think the left is really outraged? I don't. This is really only about one thing. No matter what is said or written in the future about Pres. George Bush there is one fact they can never change;
Bush kept us safe after 9-11 from another attack. He promised he would do everything possible to do that, and he did.
This is a fact they cannot stand. They must damage it or diminish it in some way. That is what this about.
It's really quite sad and pathetic when you think about it. Their anger being a result of innocent Americans not being blown to bits or being flown into buildings. "DAMN George Bush for the war on terror working out that way! DAMN HIM!"
Oh, they will never admit it. I doubt they even admit it to themselves. What else can explain the warped sense of anger that pervades the left? Even as they have won the White House and the Congress, their anger seethes.
They can't change the past. So they will only try to sully it.
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Former CIA chief Goss: (via HotAir)
Posted by RightwingSparkle at 12:11 PM