Feinstein: Holder should have waited

#1

SavageOrangeJug

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2007
Messages
3,569
Likes
6
#1
Holder has one thing in common with his boss. He's totally unqualified for his job.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif..), the chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, criticized Attorney General Eric Holder on Sunday for moving ahead with an investigation into harsh CIA interrogation techniques.

“Candidly, I wish the attorney general had waited,” Feinstein said on CBS’s “Face the Nation.”. “Every day something kind of dribbles out into the public arena. Very often it has mistakes, very often it’s half a story. I think we need to get the whole story together and tell it in an appropriate way.”

Feinstein said that her committee was in the midst of taking a “total look” at the intelligence agency’s interrogation and detention practices.

“We’re well along in that study,” she said. “And I’m trying to push it along even more quickly.”

Though the she was “horrified” by the findings of the 2004 report by the CIA's Inspector General’s detailing cases of prisoner abuse, the senator said the timing of the Justice Department inquiry was “not very good.”

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz) also expressed his concern with Holder’s decision on the same program, saying that he was worried about the “morale and effectiveness” of the CIA. He said he supported President Barack Obama’s conclusion that “we ought to go forward and not back.”

McCain said that although torture has “harmed our image in the world” and served as a recruiting tool for Al Qaeda, “for us now to go back, I think would be a serious mistake.”

SOURCE: http://www.politico.com/blogs/politicolive/0809/Feinstein_Holder_Should_Have_Waited.html
 
#3
#3
Wasn't she one of the people that voiced concern (initially) over Panetta's lack of intelligence background when he was nominated. She backed off that eventually. I think that when it comes to matters of intelligence she may be a bit more willing to speak her mind...at least for a little while.
 
#4
#4
wonder what's behind her statement...
she's a mouthpiece for the democrats

One thing I noticed about the article; it didn't say specifically that she was upset that the information was going to the public, she was upset it was leaked out in pieces. My take on it is that she wants her investigation to be complete so that she can be the one to nail the CIA.
 
#5
#5
i mean seriously, let these people do their jobs and protect us. If they "torture" a few terrorists, so be it. By making this stuff public we are putting not only our agents in jeopardy but we are putting their familes in jeopardy
 
#6
#6
I'm not all that comfortable with saying if we torture a few, so be it. I'm not in favor of holding criminal investigations either because I feel that it will drag a lot of people through the mud who were following implicit, if not explicit, orders. I personally think that the CIA was asked to step over some lines it should not have. If we can find a way to prevent that from happening in the future without destroying the careers or endangering the lives of those who serve in the agency, then I am for it. I don't see how criminal prosecution is that answer.
 
#7
#7
i mean seriously, let these people do their jobs and protect us. If they "torture" a few terrorists, so be it. By making this stuff public we are putting not only our agents in jeopardy but we are putting their familes in jeopardy
This administration does not place a high priority on national security.
 
#8
#8
This administration does not place a high priority on national security.

BLING BLING BLING!!!

Understatement of the day award.

All this does bring to mind one question, namly.

If we prosecute Bush administration
CIA operatives for coercive interrogation
techniques, do we later prosecute CIA operatives for murder for firing hellfire missiles from drones to
assassinate Taliban leaders?

One of my ancestors was a Khyber,
as in Khyber pass and imo we are
playing with fire since one of the
primary tenants of the tribal code,
which has more sway than islamic
sharia law, is that a man is not a man
if he not exact retribution anywhere
in the world for a perceived wrong,
such as killing a kinsman.

In other words, we are poking a
hornets next with a short stick.

And for what, to prop up a corrupt
regime that has adopted islamic sharia
law as part of it's constitution?


securedownload2.jpg


Did this exercise actually happen or not??

NLE 09 will be the first major exercise conducted by
the United States government that will focus
exclusively on terrorism prevention and protection,
as opposed to incident response and recovery.
........................
NLE 09 is a White House directed, Congressionally-
mandated exercise that includes the participation of
all appropriate federal department and agency senior
officials, their deputies, staff and key operational
elements. In addition, broad regional participation of state, tribal, local, and private sector is anticipated.

This year the United States welcomes the participation
of Australia, Canada, Mexico and the United Kingdom
in NLE 09.

"They felt that this counter-revolution could best be
guarded against by creating and establishing re-
education centers in the Southwest, where we would
take all of the people who needed to be re-educated
into the new way of thinking and teach them how
things were going to be. I asked, well what is going to
happen to those people that we can't re-educate that
are die-hard capitalists? The reply was that they
would have to be eliminated. When I pursued this
further they estimated that they would have to
eliminate 25 million people in these re-education
centers. When I say eliminate, I mean kill … 25 million
people."

"If a nation or individual values anything more than
freedom, it will lose it's freedom; and the irony is that
if it is comfort or money it values more, it will lose that
too."
--W. Somerset Maugham

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil
to one who is striking at the root."
-- Henry David Thoreau
 

VN Store



Back
Top