RSS Feed for This PostCurrent Article

Newt Gingrich on Torture

Okay, I am VERY curious. I want to ask all of you something:

Were you surprised? I’m not because I happen to know that Newt Gingrich is a great advocate for animals and against animal cruelty. So his stance on torture, in my mind, is congruent with his attitude towards the treatment of any animal helpless in human control. (MY NEXT POST WILL BE ABOUT THE ADVOCATES FOR THE HUMANE TREATMENT OF ANIMALS — and you may be surprised by who some of them are.)

And it was good of him to mention George Washington’s views and practices re torture.

I just wish that Greta had asked him what he would have done and said had he been briefed on the torture practices as were Nancy Pelosi, John Boehner, Pete Hoekstra, and other representatives and senators.

Here, from a remarkable essay by Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., in 2005, we learn more about the remarkable history of this nation in leading the way against mistreatment of detainees and prisoners of war:

Every schoolchild knows that Gen. George Washington made extraordinary efforts to protect America’s civilian population from the ravages of war. Fewer Americans know that Revolutionary War leaders, including Washington and the Continental Congress, considered the decent treatment of enemy combatants to be one of the principal strategic preoccupations of the American Revolution.

“In 1776,” wrote historian David Hackett Fischer in “Washington’s Crossing,” “American leaders believed it was not enough to win the war. They also had to win in a way that was consistent with the values of their society and the principles of their cause. One of their greatest achievements … was to manage the war in a manner that was true to the expanding humanitarian ideals of the American Revolution.”

The fact that the patriots refused to abandon these principles, even in the dark times when the war seemed lost, when the enemy controlled our cities and our ragged army was barefoot and starving, credits the character of Washington and the founding fathers and puts to shame the conduct of America’s present leadership.

Fischer writes that leaders in both the Continental Congress and the Continental Army resolved that the War of Independence would be conducted with a respect for human rights. This was all the more extraordinary because these courtesies were not reciprocated by King George’s armies. Indeed, the British conducted a deliberate campaign of atrocities against American soldiers and civilians. While Americans extended quarter to combatants as a matter of right and treated their prisoners with humanity, British regulars and German mercenaries were threatened by their own officers with severe punishment if they showed mercy to a surrendering American soldier. Captured Americans were tortured, starved and cruelly maltreated aboard prison ships.

Washington decided to behave differently. After capturing 1,000 Hessians in the Battle of Trenton, he ordered that enemy prisoners be treated with the same rights for which our young nation was fighting. In an order covering prisoners taken in the Battle of Princeton, Washington wrote: “Treat them with humanity, and let them have no reason to Complain of our Copying the brutal example of the British Army in their treatment of our unfortunate brethren…. Provide everything necessary for them on the road.”

John Adams argued that humane treatment of prisoners and deep concern for civilian populations not only reflected the American Revolution’s highest ideals, they were a moral and strategic requirement. His thoughts on the subject, expressed in a 1777 letter to his wife, might make a profitable read for Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld as we endeavor to win hearts and minds in Iraq. Adams wrote: “I know of no policy, God is my witness, but this — Piety, Humanity and Honesty are the best Policy. Blasphemy, Cruelty and Villainy have prevailed and may again. But they won’t prevail against America, in this Contest, because I find the more of them are employed, the less they succeed.”

Even British military leaders involved in the atrocities recognized their negative effects on the overall war effort. In 1778, Col. Charles Stuart wrote to his father, the Earl of Bute: “Wherever our armies have marched, wherever they have encamped, every species of barbarity has been executed. We planted an irrevocable hatred wherever we went, which neither time nor measure will be able to eradicate.”

In the end, our founding fathers not only protected our national values, they defeated a militarily superior enemy. Indeed, it was their disciplined adherence to those values that helped them win a hopeless struggle against the best soldiers in Europe.

In accordance with this proud American tradition, President Lincoln instituted the first formal code of conduct for the humane treatment of prisoners of war in 1863. Lincoln’s order forbade any form of torture or cruelty, and it became the model for the 1929 Geneva Convention. Dwight Eisenhower made a point to guarantee exemplary treatment to German POWs in World War II, and Gen. Douglas McArthur ordered application of the Geneva Convention during the Korean War, even though the U.S. was not yet a signatory. In the Vietnam War, the United States extended the convention’s protection to Viet Cong prisoners even though the law did not technically require it.

Today, our president is again challenged to align the conduct of a war with the values of our nation. America’s treatment of its prisoners is a test of our faith in our country and the character of our leaders.

  • Ferd Berfle

    Wow. I’m in agreement with Newt on everything discussed. A “standard for civilization” is telling. He gets it.

  • PainkillerJayne

    Hiya Ferd.

    It still doesn’t excuse Pelosi after 30 briefings and knowing what was going on.

    Or any other Dem in the line of fire.

  • CentralMass

    I don’t suspect Newt was trying make excuses for anyone involved. In either party.

  • PainkillerJayne

    I think Barry opened a can of worms he can not close.

    pandora’s box?

  • CentralMass

    If that’s the case, he is doing the right thing. Time will tell.

  • oowawa

    I never liked Newt, and I still don’t. But I respect his intelligence, and I agree with him on the torture issue. The fact is, the battle-lines are being redrawn right now. We need to emerge with a new middle-of-the-spectrum coalition that includes disgruntled Democrats and Republicans.

    There are some wedge issues that are always going to be bones of contention: abortion and gun control come to mind. Many of us disagree on the limits and use of “torture.” But most of us can agree that “America first” is a uniting concept. It’s been nice for PUMA’s (of which I am one) and Republicans to find so much common ground on this blog. I used to hate Republicans passionately, and I don’t anymore.

    I’m now willing to listen patiently to Newt, and I never was before. Let’s all be patient with each other, and maybe we can, all together, move through this horrible crisis that confronts us.

  • lorac

    Mark Fiore’s new animation is on torture. It’s called “Fuzzy, the conciliation caterpillar”.

    http://www.markfiore.com/

  • arran

    I’ve never liked Newt either ever since the early ’90s with his “Contract for America”, or whatever it was called, and in came Sue Myrick, a conservative, Republican in my US House district, and we can’t get rid of her.

    Being out of the daily grind of polarizing, partisan politics has help Newt’s tone and message.

    It was something that I listened to most of the video.

  • Foxx

    As for George Washington, I read that he had his slaves teeth pulled to make his own false teeth. Anyone know different?

  • Patience

    The more I really listen to what Newt Gingrich says, the more I like him. He doesn’t seem like the flame thrower I’d always assumed he was.

    He really caught my attention during the Republican National Convention last year in his defence of Sarah Palin — I was heartened by the support he gave her at a time when she was besieged by unfair criticism. I’ve been listening to him ever since and he seems reasoned and even wise. Go figure. Times change, or maybe I’ve changed. Or maybe he’s changed. In any case, I think he possesses a formidable intellect.

  • Lyn

    I agree out of all the places I used to go online, mainly I just post here and Hillbuzz for that very reason. Country before party.

  • Eastan

    George Washington had wooden teeth. What you have read is not true.

  • http://www.marklevinshow.com Seattle Moss

    Newt has become a straight shooter after years of playing the partisan politics and getting bit royally in the ass as a result.
    I very much liked how Newt came to Hillary’s defense and seemed sincere in his admiration.
    Newt realized too late that the Clinton’s whom he had fought all those years had become the firewall to preventing a radical movement taking over the democrat party.

  • DinoSilver

    Newt seeems to have become the voice of reason in an era of knee jerk reactions to whatever the news is of the day. What strikes me as very important is his comment that whatever actions society (in this case our government because right now they seem to think we are all idots and cannot think for ourselves)takes – there are consequences. I applaud him for thinking outside the box and actually engaging our youth to discuss (what a novel idea), debate, and suggest solutions for our energy and environmental future. He is definietly someone to watch….

  • Eastan

    In 1995 I was so anti-federal republican I could not see straight. But Newt held a press conference and announced that he was introducing a bill because the NRA backed his candidates and he, in turn, owed them a favor. He said he did not give the bill any chance of passing, but he was keeping his word to a major contributor. I thought to myself then that it was the most refreshing and honest statement of the year.

    Whether you like his views and positions or not I think one must consider respecting him for his intellectual honesty.

  • http://www.marklevinshow.com Seattle Moss

    Fifteen years ago I watched Newt’s charge to congress and even then thought if there ever was a right wing Republican revolution in the future he might just lead that revolution.

    The backlash maybe that great!

    I’m not going to be a democrat or republican anymore. Damaged brands!

    Just call me a Conservative!

  • arran

    I don’t know how it could be done or how long it would take to sink in by the world, but this country needs to redeem itself and then stand up to the world as a country of undoubtful strength, greatness, and leadership. Too bad Hillary isn’t President because she knows how to make the fixes and stare the world down.

    It’s too late to argue with me. Read about our history. A bunch of whohaws that came here and in 170 years their country was a world power–unheard of. I can feel the “General Patton” moment swell as I type. (“Hell, yeah, let’s match on into Russia and take them out.”)

    No yellow bellies reside here, George!

  • socalannie

    I couldn’t agree more with both of your comments (Patience & Mossy). I think you’re both right…Newt was arrogant during the 90′s, but time & circumstances have mellowed him out & given him more wisdom, as it has for all of us. I think we’ve all changed.

  • TeakwoodKite

    Newt has the advantage of a long study of history.

  • http://www.marklevinshow.com Seattle Moss

    Newt like many of us have been humbled and matured from experiences of life.

    Newt is like us now!

    The super majority in the center continues to grow

  • http://www.lesstalkmoreactivism.blogspot.com whoframedrudy

    I like to think that Hillary beat some sense into him.

  • Katmoon

    It’s true oowawa. When we have a baseline belief we all agree on, such as country first, the other issues we disagree on have the possibility of being worked out together. I only imagine the arguments and fights our ancestors had trying to put together he Constitution,and each and every amendment after the Bill of Rights. You know they were heated and passionate. It comes first circle, after this last election. Many of us started united for then Senator Clinton as our candidate, then united against the divisive tactics of the DNC, then united in support of Senator McCain after the Democratic primaries ended. Once O took office we became united either against O on certain issues or became a driving force against this administration, but to no purpose, mostly still very angry, yet very clear issue for issue where we stood.

    Then the tea parties happened…something clicked, and something profound happened. We see a larger group from both sides and the center. I believe this is the group that will “hold” the center together (with apologies to William Butler Yeats; “Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold”)

    Over these past few days there have been serious discussions, in strong, passionate, intelligent writings that indicate one very central theme; we all care, to our very core.

    I too, am able to “hear” Newt for the first time, maybe that’s what it takes to see and find that common ground. I don’t think I seek just another voice in agreement, I listen for a message that resonates and stands on its own; that has the qualities to benefit our country as a whole, serving no single entity, for favor over another.

    In these times, this will be the voices together, that can carry and generate the message of Country First, four square with the Constitution. It is my hope our perspectives on issues will not remove our ability to hold the center, for the sake of all of us.

  • http://sarainitalyblog.blogspot.com sarainitaly

    Does anyone know how many people they actually waterboarded? (I thought it was three, but I might be wrong)

    Do we know what they tried before they resorted to waterboarding, or did they go straight to waterboadring?

  • James Guglielmino

    Just ONE minute! Before we get all dewy eyed over how sentient the Newt is, please answer this question: Where was this voice of reason during the years after the revelations of torture first occurred? I’ll even answer the question for you. It was silent. Of course, the same thing is essentially true of McCain. Neither of THESE stalwarts put their nation before their party. Both were in a position to stand for something that is vastly more important, or should be, than loyalty to their party.

  • mountainaires

    Gingrich is a student, a teacher and a writer of history. But, Newt Gingrich is also working with Al Sharpton in New York on educational policy and has worked with people from other political parties on other issues as well. Yeah, he’s an ideologue; but he’s not always a “johnny-one-note” so I respect his voice, even if I don’t always agree with him.

    I’m so glad you posted the RFK essay on torture. Thank you for that. I’m involved in a discussion with a friend these days on the torture issue–she has been propagandized into thinking she’s safer if we torture prisoners–and she brought up RFK recently. So, I can now send her that essay for her further education. ;-)

    I’m with Newt and RFK: Torture is morally wrong; it’s illegal; and it doesn’t work. There is simply no reason to inflict torture except a sadistic revenge fantasy, and it’s the height of arrogance, because torture cheerleaders always want someone else to do the dirty work for them–certainly then, they can pretend to themselves that they haven’t been soiled by their sadistic fantasies of power and control, so that they personally aren’t brutalized by what they’ve done. But, those who torture–US soldiers ordered to do so; CIA interrogators ordered to do so–are brutalized by what they do to prisoners. So, torture supporters’ sadistic revenge fantasies or authoritarian need for strong “leaders” to protect them from “bad men” are simply the only reason to support torture. They are propagandized by the very authoritarian “leaders” they should be rejecting, and who make them less safe, but who will happily indulge–exploit–their sadistic revenge fantasies for personal and political gain for themselves.

    Think for yourself. Don’t be a torture bot. Read these quotes and you’ll know whether or not you align yourself with RFK or some of the other “authoritarian leaders” who expoit people’s fears for political agendas.

    “One thing is for certain: There won’t be any more mass graves and torture rooms and rape rooms.” – George W. Bush [press availability in Monterrey, Mexico, Jan. 12, 2004]

    =

    “Shamefully we now learn that Saddam’s torture chambers reopened under new management, U.S. management.” – - Edward Kennedy

    =

    “We don’t torture people in America and people who say we do simply know nothing about our country.” – George W. Bush [Interview with Australian TV - October 18, 2003]

    =

    “The bill Congress sent me would take away one of the most valuable tools in the war on terror – the CIA program to detain and question key terrorist leaders and operatives.” George W. Bush on his veto of a bill that would have outlawed waterboarding in March 2008

    =

    How many people have made this argument lately?


    “This fight has nothing to do with soldierly gallantry or principles of the Geneva Convention. If the fight against the partisans is not waged with the most brutal means, we will shortly reach the point where the available forces are insufficient to control the area. It is therefore not only justified, but it is the duty of the troops to use all means without restriction, even against women and children, so long as it ensures success”. – - Wilhelm Keitel, chief of staff of the Supreme Command of the Armed Forces of Germany [Dec. 16, 1942]

    =

    “The degree of civilization in a society can be judged by entering its prisons”. – Fyodor Dostoyevsky (1821-1881), Russian novelist

    =
    My personal favorite:

    “The first sign of corruption in a society that is still alive is that the end justifies the means.”: Georges Bernanos

  • I’m a Linda too

    I was pleasantly surprised to hear Newt’s position(s) as he discussed them.

    My position is, we learned of the torture years ago, it was wrong then and still is.

    But the Democrats didn’t want to do anything about it then, especially because they didn’t even oppose it when they could have, but still, now everyone knows why Nancy said she wouldn’t pursue anything, because SHE KNEW. Maybe her colleagues didn’t, but she did.

    And, having said that, her colleagues can now blame HER for allowing…asking for harsher interrogations, covering it up, and now politicizing it after the fact.

    What Weary Barry and Nancy have done is use it for political grand standing only. That doesn’t take away what they and the others did and doesn’t change that he said no prosecuting would come from it, he just wanted to release the information on something we knew about, just to deflect the heat he was on for continuing and expanding the other bush policies he campaigned against. Oops, there I said it again, campaigned on, “THERE YOU GO”-Obama.

    What is happening now is not about whether toruring is wrong or right or if it is American policy or not.

    What is happening is Weary Barry throwing this all back in for polical reasons and trying to change the conversation from his other failures, but while doing so, he went too far and now has created another problem, not to mention now softening the past decided acts of torture, because he has put our country, it’s people serving at risk for his political efforts.

  • Benjamin Franklin Berfle

    I agree, PK. I don’t care who was involved because they all should have known better, Pelosi especially. She is the worst form of vermin.

  • Benjamin Franklin Berfle

    Wow, Goober, you’re on a downhill roll. McCain made his views known as did Gingrich.

    How’s that over-stuffed blathering fool of a POTUS working for you? Not so good, huh? He’s just Bush Redux with a tan. Well, he’s yours, you own him, and there’s no lemon law to protect you. Too bad, troll.

  • mountainaires

    “This fight has nothing to do with soldierly gallantry or principles of the Geneva Convention. If the fight against the partisans is not waged with the most brutal means, we will shortly reach the point where the available forces are insufficient to control the area. It is therefore not only justified, but it is the duty of the troops to use all means without restriction, even against women and children, so long as it ensures success”. – - Wilhelm Keitel, chief of staff of the Supreme Command of the Armed Forces of Germany [Dec. 16, 1942]

    The concept of the banality of evil came into prominence following the publication of Hannah Arendt’s 1963 book Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil, which was based on the trial of Adolph Eichmann in Jerusalem. Arendt’s thesis was that people who carry out unspeakable crimes, like Eichmann, a top administrator in the machinery of the Nazi death camps, may not be crazy fanatics at all, but rather ordinary individuals who simply accept the premises of their state and participate in any ongoing enterprise with the energy of good bureaucrats.– by Edward S. Herman

    http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7278.htm

    April 26, 2009
    Op-Ed Columnist
    The Banality of Bush White House Evil

    The report found that Maj. Paul Burney, a United States Army psychiatrist assigned to interrogations in Guantánamo Bay that summer of 2002, told Army investigators of another White House imperative: “A large part of the time we were focused on trying to establish a link between Al Qaeda and Iraq and we were not being successful.” As higher-ups got more “frustrated” at the inability to prove this connection, the major said, “there was more and more pressure to resort to measures” that might produce that intelligence.

    In other words, the ticking time bomb was not another potential Qaeda attack on America but the Bush administration’s ticking timetable for selling a war in Iraq; it wanted to pressure Congress to pass a war resolution before the 2002 midterm elections. Bybee’s memo was written the week after the then-secret (and subsequently leaked) “Downing Street memo,” in which the head of British intelligence informed Tony Blair that the Bush White House was so determined to go to war in Iraq that “the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.” A month after Bybee’s memo, on Sept. 8, 2002, Cheney would make his infamous appearance on “Meet the Press,” hyping both Saddam’s W.M.D.s and the “number of contacts over the years” between Al Qaeda and Iraq. If only 9/11 could somehow be pinned on Iraq, the case for war would be a slamdunk.

    But there were no links between 9/11 and Iraq, and the White House knew it. Torture may have been the last hope for coercing such bogus “intelligence” from detainees who would be tempted to say anything to stop the waterboarding.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/26/opinion/26rich.html?_r=1&pagewanted=print

  • oowawa

    This was a good positive statement to start out my Sunday morning. Thanks for sharing your perspective, Katmoon.

  • Benjamin Franklin Berfle

    I used to hate Republicans passionately, and I don’t anymore.

    I find myself in agreement with you, oowawa (again!). As a fellow PUMA, I increasingly find that my views are more represented by the moderate Republicans, which is quite disconcerting at times.

    I’m now willing to listen patiently to Newt, and I never was before. Let’s all be patient with each other, and maybe we can, all together, move through this horrible crisis that confronts us.

    Amen. Country first.

  • oowawa

    Persuasive statement & interesting collection of citations, mountainaires. Thanks.

  • Elizabeth

    http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/Investigation/story?id=1322866

    According to CIA sources, Ibn al Shaykh al Libbi, after two weeks of enhanced interrogation, made statements that were designed to tell the interrogators what they wanted to hear. Sources say Al Libbi had been subjected to each of the progressively harsher techniques in turn and finally broke after being water boarded and then left to stand naked in his cold cell overnight where he was doused with cold water at regular intervals.

    His statements became part of the basis for the Bush administration claims that Iraq trained al Qaeda members to use biochemical weapons. Sources tell ABC that it was later established that al Libbi had no knowledge of such training or weapons and fabricated the statements because he was terrified of further harsh treatment.

    “This is the problem with using the waterboard. They get so desperate that they begin telling you what they think you want to hear,” one source said.

    However, sources said, al Libbi does not appear to have sought to intentionally misinform investigators, as at least one account has stated. The distinction in this murky world is nonetheless an important one. Al Libbi sought to please his investigators, not lead them down a false path, two sources with firsthand knowledge of the statements said.

  • CentralMass

    Regrading McCain.

    http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/10/06/senate.detainees/index.html
    Senate ignores veto threat in limiting detainee treatment
    “he measure, sponsored by Sen. John McCain, R-Arizona, would require American troops to follow interrogation standards set in the Army Field Manual and bar “cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment” of prisoners in U.S. custody.

    On Wednesday night, senators voted 90-9 to include the provision to the $440 billion Defense Department spending bill now wending its way through Congress.

    Earlier, White House spokesman Scott McClellan said President Bush would likely veto the defense spending bill if McCain’s language were included, calling the amendment “unnecessary and duplicative.”

    “If it’s presented, then there would be a recommendation of a veto, I believe,” McClellan said.”
    “Arguing for his amendment, McCain, a former Navy pilot who spent more than five years in a North Vietnamese prison camp, said “our troops are not served by ambiguity.”

    “We demanded intelligence without ever clearly telling our troops what was permitted and what was forbidden. And then, when things went wrong, we blamed them and we punished them. We have to do better than that,” he said.

    McCain said an officer in the 82nd Airborne Division, Capt. Ian Fishback, urged his office to push for clear guidelines for the treatment of prisoners after unsuccessfully attempting to get answers from his superiors for 17 months.”

    and
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10480690/
    “WASHINGTON – President Bush reversed course on Thursday and accepted Sen. John McCain’s call for a law banning cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment of foreign suspects in the war on terror.

    Bush said the agreement will “make it clear to the world that this government does not torture and that we adhere to the international convention of torture, whether it be here at home or abroad.”

    “It’s a done deal,” said McCain, talking to reporters outside the White House. “

  • CentralMass

    I’d say even if it was one, it was one too many.

  • margarita

    I can honestly say that I’m surprised that a debate about torture is even going on. Torture is wrong and dare I say it, it’s unAmerican as far as I’m concerned. And I don’t give a damn what anyone else thinks about it and will never change my mind. I don’t care about the imagined scenarios to try and justify using torture. I think those who use it and didn’t stand against it are the same as the people they think are our enemies. No amount of rationalization can excuse the disgusting place they’ve put themselves in the world and it makes me ashamed for them.

    Torture is wrong. period.

  • trixta

    Agreed, but I’d still like to hear Newt apologize for the witch hunt he and his GOP conducted against the Clintons in the 90s. As acting Speaker of the House, he lead (behind the scenes) the drive for the impeachment of Pres Clinton while he [Newt] was having his own sordid affair with a staff member. I believe he’s on wife #3 now.

  • trixta

    Newt realized too late that the Clinton’s whom he had fought all those years had become the firewall to preventing a radical movement taking over the democrat party.

    So true, SM! If the GOP would and the msm had scrutinized Obama as they did the Clintons–or even GWB toward the end of his presidency, BO would never be pres now.

  • trixta

    i.e. “If the GOP and the msm had …”

  • Benjamin Franklin Berfle

    Well, in Newt’s defense, I don’t think his heart was fully in it. Bob Barr was the driving force behind impeachment and I believe it was his constant pushing that made it possible.

  • trixta

    Yeah, Margarita, that there is even a mention of — let alone a debate on — torture as a strategy in this country has always shocked me.

  • Elizabeth

    I know! You grow up thinking these things were done by the evil Vietnamese or Soviets. How did we ever get to the point it was even debatable here ?

    I do think a greater good can still happen, though, if the top level officials are investigated, charged and convicted. At least that will go a long way in clearing America’s name as a rogue nation and hopefully containing the damage to a forgettable eight years.

  • http://! stodgie

    hey foxx, stop reading comic books and thinking they are history books. your american history knowledge is sorely lacking. do you go to rev wright’s church?????

  • http://! stodgie

    elizabeth, with obama it is now a forgettable 12 years.

  • Peggy Sue

    I have to confess, I was surprised at Gingrich’s stance on torture. But I’m glad he expressed it, glad he referenced the fact that his opinion was shaped by the likes of John McCain and other military men. If we don’t beleive our men in the field, who should we believe?

    I agree, that the issue of torture is a matter of our own self-respect. Those who sanctioned these methods do not want the practices labeled “torture” for obvious reasons. The job description is too gruesome: Torturer-in-Chief.

    On the other hand, I don’t think starting a witch hunt serves the nation’s interest, unless we’re ready to bring the whole house down. Witch hunts tend to have a life of their own, quickly spinning out of control. I think airing the issue, debating and prohibiting the practice of waterboarding in the future is the most important thing.

    I don’t like Obama. More importantly, I don’t trust him or his shady backers. But I don’t think they’re fools.

    Thanks for the piece, Susan. I particularly enjoyed the historical info.

  • Terry

    Lets get something straight. Pelosi was sworn to not reveal ANYTHING she was briefed on by the CIA. Do all you right wing slack jaws under stand that. And there were Republicans who were briefed along with her and if she had revealed what she heard they would have filed charges against her as would have been their right.Besides the CIA did NOT reveal what type of tactics they were using. Only that they were “legal” Pathetic.

  • http://chaze77.wordpress.com/2009/05/16/newt-gingrich-nancy-pelosi-and-hypocrisy-again/ Newt Gingrich, Nancy Pelosi and Hypocrisy… Again « C-Haze77…

    [...] Gingrich himself does not support torture, and for that I congratulate him. His is not a popular position within the Republican Party right now, and I applaud him for taking a stand. [...]

blog comments powered by Disqus