OBAMA SAYS NO TO 7 FORMER CIA DIRECTORS

T

TuTu Monroe

A Realist
Who is Obama trying to impress? The far-left? We have already reviewed this. Sheeesh!!!

September 20, 2009Obama: Justice OK to conduct interrogation review

The Associated PressPresident Barack Obama says he has no plans to ask the Justice Department to end its criminal investigation into the harsh interrogations of suspected terrorists during the Bush administration.



Seven former CIA directors have asked the president to do just that. In a letter to Obama on Friday, they warned that the probe could discourage CIA officers from doing the kind of aggressive intelligence work needed to fight terrorism.
Obama tells CBS' "Face the Nation" that he appreciates that the former CIA chiefs are wanting "to look after an institution that they helped to build."


Obama says he wants to make sure that he's not somehow overruling the decisions of prosecutors such as Attorney General Eric Holder who are there to uphold the law.


rcp.com
 
TuTu Monroe said:
Who is Obama trying to impress? The far-left? We have already reviewed this. Sheeesh!!!

September 20, 2009Obama: Justice OK to conduct interrogation review

The Associated PressPresident Barack Obama says he has no plans to ask the Justice Department to end its criminal investigation into the harsh interrogations of suspected terrorists during the Bush administration.

Seven former CIA directors have asked the president to do just that. In a letter to Obama on Friday, they warned that the probe could discourage CIA officers from doing the kind of aggressive intelligence work needed to fight terrorism.
Obama tells CBS' "Face the Nation" that he appreciates that the former CIA chiefs are wanting "to look after an institution that they helped to build."

Obama says he wants to make sure that he's not somehow overruling the decisions of prosecutors such as Attorney General Eric Holder who are there to uphold the law.

rcp.com
Click to expand...

Click here for full text of letter from the 7 former CIA directors to Obama
 
TuTu Monroe said:
Who is Obama trying to impress? The far-left? We have already reviewed this. Sheeesh!!!

September 20, 2009Obama: Justice OK to conduct interrogation review

The Associated PressPresident Barack Obama says he has no plans to ask the Justice Department to end its criminal investigation into the harsh interrogations of suspected terrorists during the Bush administration.

Seven former CIA directors have asked the president to do just that. In a letter to Obama on Friday, they warned that the probe could discourage CIA officers from doing the kind of aggressive intelligence work needed to fight terrorism.
Obama tells CBS' "Face the Nation" that he appreciates that the former CIA chiefs are wanting "to look after an institution that they helped to build."

Obama says he wants to make sure that he's not somehow overruling the decisions of prosecutors such as Attorney General Eric Holder who are there to uphold the law.

rcp.com
Click to expand...

What the heck is this supposed to mean? "the probe could discourage CIA officers from doing the kind of aggressive intelligence work needed to fight terrorism."

I read it as torture.
 
TuTu Monroe said:
Who is Obama trying to impress? The far-left? We have already reviewed this. Sheeesh!!!

September 20, 2009Obama: Justice OK to conduct interrogation review

The Associated PressPresident Barack Obama says he has no plans to ask the Justice Department to end its criminal investigation into the harsh interrogations of suspected terrorists during the Bush administration.



Seven former CIA directors have asked the president to do just that. In a letter to Obama on Friday, they warned that the probe could discourage CIA officers from doing the kind of aggressive intelligence work needed to fight terrorism.
Obama tells CBS' "Face the Nation" that he appreciates that the former CIA chiefs are wanting "to look after an institution that they helped to build."


Obama says he wants to make sure that he's not somehow overruling the decisions of prosecutors such as Attorney General Eric Holder who are there to uphold the law.


rcp.com
Click to expand...

The law is the law, no matter who thinks what.
 
It means that Obama is keeping his word in spite of 7 prior CIA guys opinions?

Why would you complain about Obama keeping his word about eliminating official torture in our govt?

My sense must not be as common as some common people are.
 
TuTu Monroe said:
Click here for full text of letter from the 7 former CIA directors to Obama
Click to expand...

I read the letter. Following are a few excerpts.

"damage the willingness of many other intelligence officers to take risks"

"Success in intelligence often depends on surprise and deception"

"past intelligence operations can only help Al Qaeda"

"certain results of these reopened investigations is the serious damage done to our intelligence community's ability to obtain the cooperation of foreign intelligence agencies. Foreign services are already greatly concerned about the United States' inability to maintain any secrets."

What does any of that have to do with CIA people accused of torturing? Willingness to take risks? The risk of being found guilty of torturing?

Surprise and deception? We're not talking about warrant-less, midnight raids or someone telling a lie.

Divulging past intelligence operations? The focus is not on how the person was captured or who helped or what information they received. It's about torturing the individual after they were apprehended.

Foreign services concern over the inability of the US to maintain secrets? Again, questionable procedures foreign countries may have used for information gathering (IE: illegal wire-tapping, etc), tips and other tactics are not the focus. This is about torture. War crimes.

This is about what US citizens did to the detainees.

People were tortured. Cheney admitted to water-boarding and water-boarding is considered a torture. One prisoner passed out over 100 times! Is there anyone, anyone at all, who can say suffering a procedure that results in a prisoner passing out over 100 times is not torture?

The last investigation resulted in one conviction. ONE! It goes beyond outrage.

If this is let slip by what's going to prevent it from happening again? Or worse?
 
I still think waterboarding should have been used on Cheney to get the truth about the lies leading up to the Iraq invasion out of him.
After all it would have saved American lives.
 
apple0154 said:
I read the letter. Following are a few excerpts.

"damage the willingness of many other intelligence officers to take risks"

"Success in intelligence often depends on surprise and deception"

"past intelligence operations can only help Al Qaeda"

"certain results of these reopened investigations is the serious damage done to our intelligence community's ability to obtain the cooperation of foreign intelligence agencies. Foreign services are already greatly concerned about the United States' inability to maintain any secrets."

What does any of that have to do with CIA people accused of torturing? Willingness to take risks? The risk of being found guilty of torturing?

Surprise and deception? We're not talking about warrant-less, midnight raids or someone telling a lie.

Divulging past intelligence operations? The focus is not on how the person was captured or who helped or what information they received. It's about torturing the individual after they were apprehended.

Foreign services concern over the inability of the US to maintain secrets? Again, questionable procedures foreign countries may have used for information gathering (IE: illegal wire-tapping, etc), tips and other tactics are not the focus. This is about torture. War crimes.

This is about what US citizens did to the detainees.

People were tortured. Cheney admitted to water-boarding and water-boarding is considered a torture. One prisoner passed out over 100 times! Is there anyone, anyone at all, who can say suffering a procedure that results in a prisoner passing out over 100 times is not torture?

The last investigation resulted in one conviction. ONE! It goes beyond outrage.

If this is let slip by what's going to prevent it from happening again? Or worse?
Click to expand...

CIA personnel's morale is now at -52. What we are going to be seeing is them leaving the CIA. We have a lot of top-notch agents in the CIA, but they have had it. I'll tell you what, put the liberals in charge and they can do the CIA work. I doubt if they can last a day.
 
Considering the brilliant intelligence coups coming out of Langley since Papa Bush ran the spy-shop, we'd be better off asking the Peace Corps for information, wouldn't we?
 
christiefan915 said:
What the heck is this supposed to mean? "the probe could discourage CIA officers from doing the kind of aggressive intelligence work needed to fight terrorism."

I read it as torture.
Click to expand...
What TuTu is saying is that she agrees that some people should be above the law and not held accountable for their actions even when they are as reprehensible and criminal as torture. I guess she doesn't give a fuck for human rights.
 
TuTu Monroe said:
CIA personnel's morale is now at -52. What we are going to be seeing is them leaving the CIA. We have a lot of top-notch agents in the CIA, but they have had it. I'll tell you what, put the liberals in charge and they can do the CIA work. I doubt if they can last a day.
Click to expand...
How could anyone do worse then the right wing nuts? Let me explain it to you TuTu and like maybe you'll understand. There's these things called rights. All human beings have them. It means some government thug can't torture you and if that government thug does, then THE RULE OF LAW, says they will be held accountable and be punished for their crime. Now I can understand that there are people who are such cowardly chicken shits that they have to look under their bad at night to make sure a bogey man isn't under it and that these cowards are more then willing to throw away my rights to make sure there are never ever bogey mans under their bed. The problem is, I and most of my fellow Americans are not chicken shit cowards and we believe in holding thugs, even when they work for the government, accountable for criminal acts. Now you may be a coward and not give a shit about human rights and the rule of law but that's your problem. The rest of us aren't chicken shit cowards.
 
TuTu Monroe said:
CIA personnel's morale is now at -52. What we are going to be seeing is them leaving the CIA. We have a lot of top-notch agents in the CIA, but they have had it. I'll tell you what, put the liberals in charge and they can do the CIA work. I doubt if they can last a day.
Click to expand...
Oh my! Well we'd better grab an arab and torture him so that we can improve moral at Langley. So why do you believe that those employed by the CIA should be above the law? Why are they special? Why do they get to violate other human beings rights and not be held accountable? Why do they get to commit crimes and not be punished for it? Why are they special?
 
What I see of this is that Obama is letting the courts decide a criminal matter.

He is not over-riding it for political gain or based on his own personal feelings in the matter.


If the agents are innocent, they have nothing to fear. If they are guilty, they should be punished.
 
TuTu Monroe said:
CIA personnel's morale is now at -52. What we are going to be seeing is them leaving the CIA. We have a lot of top-notch agents in the CIA, but they have had it. I'll tell you what, put the liberals in charge and they can do the CIA work. I doubt if they can last a day.
Click to expand...

Their morale? Again, this is about torture. If being permitted to torture individuals is necessary to keep up the morale of CIA agents something is terribly wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top