Obama considers prosecution for torture

[Amtkhog]

Originally Posted by momster

Ha maybe I can test it out on you.. xo

You wouldn't get the pleasure you're imagining... I might like it. xo

Originally Posted by Amtkhog

You wouldn't get the pleasure you're imagining... I might like it. xo

Really.. well that would change things now wouldn't it.
XoXo

Rasmussen Reports

Rasmussen Reports: The Most Comprehensive Public Opinion Data Anywhere

who said this today..

“If we have another 2,000 people killed, I want Nancy Pelosi and [liberal philanthropist] George Soros, John Conyers and Pat Leahy to go to the funeral and say, ‘Your son was vaporized because we didn’t want to dump some guy’s head under water for 30 seconds.’”


And this..

“Mr. Obama may think he can soar above all of this, but he’ll soon learn otherwise. The Beltway’s political energy will focus more on the spectacle of revenge, and less on his agenda. The CIA will have its reputation smeared, and its agents second-guessing themselves. And if there is another terror attack against Americans, Mr. Obama will have set himself up for the argument that his campaign against the Bush policies are partly to blame.”


and you all will love this one, who said this

“At the White House, Press Secretary Adam Brickley said that President Sarah Palin stands firmly behind the decision. ‘It’s not as if we relish the thought of prosecuting members of the previous administration,’ Brickley said, ‘but, at this point, there is a clearly established precedent – set in place by the Obama Administration themselves – which says that government officials must be held accountable if they contributed in any way to major breaches of the law. In this case, the individuals under investigation do appear to have purposefully allowed these terrorists to continue their actions – prioritizing international public opinion over the lives of the American people. So, while this may be a politically charged issue, there is a real need to prosecute.’”

[Northern]

Originally Posted by momster

who said this today..

“If we have another 2,000 people killed, I want Nancy Pelosi and [liberal philanthropist] George Soros, John Conyers and Pat Leahy to go to the funeral and say, ‘Your son was vaporized because we didn’t want to dump some guy’s head under water for 30 seconds.’”


And this..

“Mr. Obama may think he can soar above all of this, but he’ll soon learn otherwise. The Beltway’s political energy will focus more on the spectacle of revenge, and less on his agenda. The CIA will have its reputation smeared, and its agents second-guessing themselves. And if there is another terror attack against Americans, Mr. Obama will have set himself up for the argument that his campaign against the Bush policies are partly to blame.”


and you all will love this one, who said this

“At the White House, Press Secretary Adam Brickley said that President Sarah Palin stands firmly behind the decision. ‘It’s not as if we relish the thought of prosecuting members of the previous administration,’ Brickley said, ‘but, at this point, there is a clearly established precedent – set in place by the Obama Administration themselves – which says that government officials must be held accountable if they contributed in any way to major breaches of the law. In this case, the individuals under investigation do appear to have purposefully allowed these terrorists to continue their actions – prioritizing international public opinion over the lives of the American people. So, while this may be a politically charged issue, there is a real need to prosecute.’”

President Palin? Now that is funny. Although I thought there was more to this joke.

Originally Posted by Northern

President Palin? Now that is funny. Although I thought there was more to this joke.

yes that one is certainly a joke, but first two quotes are not.

President Obama ended his press conference yesterday with these words of reassurance to CIA agents who were involved in interrogations of terrorist captives following 9/11:
That he has their back.

"For those who carried out some of these operations within the four corners of legal opinions or guidance that had been provided from the White House, I do not think it's appropriate for them to be prosecuted. . . .

So I wanted to communicate a message yesterday to all those who overwhelmingly do so in a lawful, dedicated fashion that I have their back".


If you are a CIA agent, in the future you would be best advised to seek a legal opinion before taking any action, since the President will have your back only if you do your job in a "lawful fashion." You're not a lawyer: don't be stupid and act without a legal opinion. And it better be one that has four corners: an oral opinion is not worth the paper it's written on.

If you've done nothing wrong, not to worry -- the President will have your back. If you've got a piece of paper and can show you're within the four corners of it, no problem -- the President will have your back.

If you're too rough getting information, do not tell the President you saved the largest city in California. It is no excuse. Maybe you could have saved the city using other means. You should have gotten a legal opinion and stayed within the four corners of it.

Do not tell the president that members of both parties visited your operation and questioned whether you were being rough enough. That is not a legal opinion. The President will not have your back under those circumstances.

Be particularly careful if you do something that might be controversial and plan in staying in your current job more than four or eight years. The President will not have your back after the expiration of that period, because he will no longer be president. Be sure the lawyer who gives you a legal opinion addresses whether the "good German" defense will be applicable, in case the new president decides he only has your back if the opinion was right (in his opinion).

If you are a CIA lawyer, or a DOJ lawyer, don't expect the President to have your back. He doesn't: you're a lawyer. That legal opinion better be damn good, or you're going to jail. Your conviction will be reversed on appeal, but you won't get your money or your reputation back. So you may want to think about getting a legal opinion before you issue a legal opinion.

[Northern]

Originally Posted by momster

yes that one is certainly a joke, but first two quotes are not.

Well I didn't take any of it seriously, sorry.

Originally Posted by Northern

Well I didn't take any of it seriously, sorry.

ohhhh too bad.. xo

[Hog&Tow]

the problem here is that Mom has bought into the lie.....we are NOT safer because of torture...we do NOT have more info. it's a lie & torture is wrong & so is anyone who defends it.