By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Pelosi or CIA. Who is lying.

insomniac17 on 19 May 2009

I don't like Pelosi at all. I'd say she's lying. That's my completely uninformed opinion, so don't bash me too much for it. XD

That said, don't be so quick to associate all of us Republicans with Bush. I didn't vote for him (not old enough), and I sure as hell don't approve of everything he did. As far as I'm concerned, the Republicans were just as bad as Democrats with spending and such, and I think the party needs to return to being a conservative party.

EDIT:

sethnintendo said:
I am to the point where I really don't give a damn about either party. I would rather see another or more parties step in. Unfortunately, we have a two-party system that shuns third parties. It really doesn't matter who is telling the truth here. What should matter is why was torture legalized or tried to be made legal. The people responsible for that should be prosecuted. I believe Dick Cheney is the major culprit along with a few others. That is why Dick Cheney is going around spewing nothing but bullshit from his mouth. I wonder why so many people hate him? Also, I believe there should be term limits for Congress. Two or three terms in Congress is plenty. Once they are there longer they just become even more corrupt and really don't give a damn about serving the country to their best ability. They only care about saying anything to get them reelected again.

You know, it would be nice to have a good third party. And I agree with the term limits. What's his name... Specter, in PA? He needs to get out of there. He's spent too much time in there, and I think it's good to keep getting new people in there so there is a focus on doing good for the country, not getting reelected a billion and a half time.



Latest News/Discussion for Star Wars: Rebels and Star Wars: The Clone Wars!


Around the Network
megaman79 on 19 May 2009

^ yea i mean in this particular case. They still tortured, its pretty simple.
Yes most intelligence agencies, in alot of countries, have no idea what they are doing, Have we got Bin Laden yet?



“When we make some new announcement and if there is no positive initial reaction from the market, I try to think of it as a good sign because that can be interpreted as people reacting to something groundbreaking. ...if the employees were always minding themselves to do whatever the market is requiring at any moment, and if they were always focusing on something we can sell right now for the short term, it would be very limiting. We are trying to think outside the box.” - Satoru Iwata - This is why corporate multinationals will never truly understand, or risk doing, what Nintendo does.

highwaystar101 on 19 May 2009
TheRealMafoo said:
highwaystar101 said:

Didn't she say she was made aware in like 2002 that it "could" happen, not that it will happen. I have definitely heard that and if true it just makes the whole situation a Grey area, because the CIA would not have told her the real truth and she would not be able to deny that she knew.

 

That's the problem at the time of that briefing, it had been uses 83 times on one man (no clue how often on others).

By saying that the CIA did not tell her it's being used, she is accusing the CIA of lying to congress (an illegal activity).

Agreed

If she accuses the CIA of lying then an investigation definately needs to happen. But to be honest that is not going to happen because to me it seems like both parties are at fault and so neither want to get their hands dirty.

 



Kasz216 on 19 May 2009

It's irrelevent. Even if she is telling the truth and didn't know it was being used currently... she was briefed that they COULD be used and was like "Oh... ok!"

How is saying ok to "We may torture people in the future" any better then "Hey we are torturing people now."

Saying yes to either makes you responsible for said acts.

I'm getting so sick of this country at the moment.  Other thread following.



highwaystar101 on 19 May 2009
Kasz216 said:

It's irrelevent. Even if she is telling the truth and didn't know it was being used currently... she was briefed that they COULD be used and was like "Oh... ok!"

How is saying ok to "We may torture people in the future" any better then "Hey we are torturing people now."

Saying yes to either makes you responsible for said acts.

I'm getting so sick of this country at the moment. Other thread following.

That's what I meant by gray area lol. It seems as though if the briefing said 'could' then both parties are at fault.



Around the Network
Kasz216 on 19 May 2009
highwaystar101 said:
Kasz216 said:

It's irrelevent. Even if she is telling the truth and didn't know it was being used currently... she was briefed that they COULD be used and was like "Oh... ok!"

How is saying ok to "We may torture people in the future" any better then "Hey we are torturing people now."

Saying yes to either makes you responsible for said acts.

I'm getting so sick of this country at the moment. Other thread following.

That's what I meant by gray area lol. It seems as though if the briefing said 'could' then both parties are at fault.

Well that's what her story is... "They told me... but they didn't say they were using it!  I'd of said something then... but just because they said they might!"

Or at least that's the explination I heard.

It's utterly ridiculious.  I'm convinced politicians are all the same... with the same beliefs and simply pick parts to play because all they really want is the power to run countries.

 



Rath on 19 May 2009

Oh and by the way I agree that if its proven she's lying, she should lose her job.

However I also think that all the people responsible for the torture program need to be prosecuted, right from the top person to give the order (Cheney or Bush?) down to the person who carried it out.



Kasz216 on 19 May 2009
Rath said:
Oh and by the way I agree that if its proven she's lying, she should lose her job.

However I also think that all the people responsible for the torture program need to be prosecuted, right from the top person to give the order (Cheney or Bush?) down to the person who carried it out.

Most likely the lower members could apply the nuremburg defense.

That's why they aren't prosecuting anyone.  I'd bet a large part of the congress was in on it.



Orca_Azure on 19 May 2009

We should start waterboarding those people in the CIA to see if we can extract the real truth. ;) afterall, it's not considered torture



Kasz216 on 19 May 2009

Also... why would the CIA be lying. These were internal memos.

It's like Iraq... everyone was for it when it was happening... but against it when the political fallout hits.