CIA investigation....

[Guest]

I am really bummed out by the announcement yesterday that Holder will have a special investigator conduct hearings, albeit narrow AT THIS POINT !

I sure want our country to do the right thing, and at the same thing I want them to do whatever is necessary to protect this country, EVEN IF I may not want to hear it !

I would bet that from 9/12/2001 and ongoing for a number of years, there would be nobody...including those who know want to attack...who would oppose doing whatever had to be done.

In reading the NYTIMES today, the activity was extremely well monitored by Doctors, lawyers and managers of all kinds.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/26/us/26prison.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&hpw=&adxnnlx=1251320456-aSWWpiEwIKKA2ha0zXXcgA

I also heard yesterday an interview, not on cable tv...of a guy who was a guard there and who detailed how if in the middle of an interagation the prisoner asked to pray, the interragation must stop and allow time to pray.

All of this in a backdrop of the recently dropped charges against the Black Panthers who actually carried weapons and intimidated VOTERS at a polling place....we, or some, have been screaming about those who carried weapons to town hall meetings (and I agree with them..not very smart) but we have no outrage over someone doing this at a polling place in this country !

I am confused...who is the enemy ?

[Guest]

IMHO it's just a classic political ploy do divert the public's attention from the problems at hand. Both parties have done it I believe. Divert attention from Heath Care, to Republicans are bad and maybe get away with something.

[Guest]

IMHO it's just a classic political ploy do divert the public's attention from the problems at hand. Both parties have done it I believe. Divert attention from Heath Care, to Republicans are bad and maybe get away with something.

:agree::agree::agree:

He loves to run against Bush. He has so far shown himself to be worthless. IMHO

Yoda

A member of the loyal opposition

[Guest]

Herbert Meyer, "a leading authority on the strategic use of intelligence" has this to say...

"There is now just one group of people exempt from President Obama's worldwide ban on torture: the men and women of the CIA.

By authorizing Attorney General Eric Holder to appoint a special prosecutor to determine whether a full criminal investigation of CIA employees and contractors is warranted for the manner in which they interrogated captured terrorists, the President has thrown his power and support behind those far-left ideologues -- in Congress and elsewhere -- who believe that the CIA is a bigger threat to our country than al Qaeda"

A good read which has this for a thought provoking ending...

"If President Obama and his supporters are right -- that what confronts us isn't a war but merely a complex international law-enforcement problem -- in the coming years not much will happen. We'll see the occasional bombing here or there, every so often an airliner will inexplicably fall out of the sky, and in a half-dozen or so countries most of us cannot even find on a map some previously unheard-of groups of thugs will seize power. But with the exception of those few of us unlucky enough to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, life will go on.

But if President Bush and those of us who supported him are right -- that we are in the midst of a global war on whose outcome rests the survival of Western civilization -- the future will unfold in a different and much less pleasant way. The forces of radical Islam will surge, our "allies" will cave in to pressure and cut deals with our mortal enemies, and at some point down the road -- seven years from now, three years from now, or perhaps next Tuesday -- something ghastly will happen."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/08/26/what_the_presidents_attack_on_the_cia_really_means _98045.html

[Guest]

Wall St Journal from five days ago...

"President Obama's Justice Department continues to stonewall inquiries about why it dropped a voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther Party.

The episode—which Bartle Bull, a former civil rights lawyer and publisher of the left-wing Village Voice, calls "the most blatant form of voter intimidation I've ever seen"—began on Election Day 2008. Mr. Bull and others witnessed two Black Panthers in paramilitary garb at a polling place near downtown Philadelphia. (Some of this behavior is on YouTube.)

One of them, they say, brandished a nightstick at the entrance and pointed it at voters and both made racial threats. Mr. Bull says he heard one yell "You are about to be ruled by the black man, cracker!"

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052970203550604574361071968458430.html

From today's Wall St Journal....

"Whoever advised people to be skeptical of what they read in the papers must have had in mind this week's coverage of the documents about CIA interrogations. Now that we've had a chance to read the reports, it's clear the real story isn't the few cases of abuse played up by the media. The news is that the program was thoughtfully developed, carefully circumscribed, briefed to Congress, and yielded information crucial to disrupting al Qaeda.

In other words, it worked—at least until politics got in the way"

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203706604574375012840827276.html

But folks on here tell us this is the CHANGE...this is what we are to believe in....this is why we should trust the current administration !

[Guest]

Well, let's see who gets richer off this.

Special Prosecutors are appointed from the private bar. They come from law firms selected by the Attorney General whose office approves their billing. The "special prosecutor" includes the named person, and any associates. paralegals and clerks assisting the named person. As a result, such an appointment is not a cash cow, but a cash herd of cattle for the firm involved.

In this situation special prosecutor is a misnomer, as the named person doesn't prosecute anyone. Independent investigator is closer to the truth, but still not fully correct. The named person is given a specific charter to "determine whether....." and whether that determination is sufficient to seek an indictment is still a decision by the appropriate government prosecutor (in this case, AG Holder or a subordinate U.S. Attorney).

What is for certain: 1) this investigation will take time; 2) it will cost a lot of money; 3) it will be done under the name of a specific partner in a law firm selected sole-source by the Attorney General; and 4) the results won't be released (if ever) until it is politically expedient to do so.