Is a 'citizens arrest' called for at this time?

In a Washington Post op-edFriday, Rodriguez accused Rockefeller and other Democrats of hypocrisy for opposing the torture of terrorism suspects after being briefed on such actions and giving their tacit support, a claim Rockefeller clearly felt was ridiculous given his years of investigating the agency’s use of torture and efforts to publicly release the Senate Democrats’ CIA torture report, which finally occurred on Tuesday.

But Rodriguez’s charge of Democratic hypocrisy—shared by many Republicans on Capitol Hill—beg a review of what two top Democratic Congressmen, Rockefeller and House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, knew of the CIA’s interrogation program.

In early September 2002, the CIA briefed Pelosi and other top members on the House Intelligence Committee about the enhanced interrogation techniques. The members and staffers “questioned the legality of these techniques if other countries would use them,” but the CIA’s Counterterrorism Center legal staff deleted from a draft memo that sentence, according to the Senate Intelligence Committee’snew report. Rodriguez, who was CTC director at the time, replied in an email, “short and sweet.”

Pelosi’s definitive response has been the same since 2009, when she said that she was not told in the briefing that waterboarding or any other enhanced methods had already been used—even though they had been. She did recall then that the Administration did say those methods are legal. She added that she heard about the use of some of the EITs in early 2003, but did not speak out due to government secrecy rules and worked to ban the use of torture through legislation and electing a Democratic President in 2008. Rodriguez charges that he briefed Pelosi of the EITs, including waterboarding, had been used in 2002.

One of Rodriguez’s main points on an alleged Democratic flip-flop is that congressional leaders like Rockefeller tacitly supported the interrogation program as they participated in dozens of briefings between 2002 and 2009. Rockefeller took to the Senate floor Tuesday to detail how exasperating those briefings were, calling them “a check box exercise that the Administration planned to use and later did use so they could disingenuously claim that they had—in a phrase I will never forget—‘fully brief the Congress.’” He called his efforts to investigate the CIA interrogation program, which led to Intelligence Chairman Dianne Feinstein’s new study, “the hardest fight I’ve ever been through.” (Oh, Really?)

http://time.com/3625297/tortur...emocratic-lawmakers/

The only one who should be arrested is the traitorous coward in the white house who calls himself the "president".

Funny water boarding is frowned on but no one bats a eye when the Obama administration takes out people with drones - some even U.S. Citizens.   Me thinks the "outrage" is political.   

I wonder who history will be kinder to after the fog of politics clears; a president who did all he could to get past congress to protect Americans and the rest of the civilized world or one who cozies up to state sponsors of terrorism like Iran and leaves the back door of our borders open?

You would need to add these demos to your list as they voted for it.

• 58% of Democratic senators (29 of 50) voted for the resolution. Those voting for the resolution are:

Sens. Lincoln (D-AR), Feinstein (D-CA), Dodd (D-CT), Lieberman (D-CT), Biden (D-DE), Carper (D-DE), Nelson (D-FL), Cleland (D-GA), Miller (D-GA), Bayh (D-IN), Harkin (D-IA), Breaux (D-LA), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Kerry (D-MA), Carnahan (D-MO), Baucus (D-MT), Nelson (D-NE), Reid (D-NV), Torricelli (D-NJ), Clinton (D-NY), Schumer (D-NY), Edwards (D-NC), Dorgan (D-ND), Hollings (D-SC), Daschle (D-SD), Johnson (D-SD), Cantwell (D-WA), Rockefeller (D-WV), and Kohl (D-WI).

A picture is worth a thousand words. Here are my thousand words. For those that believe that the government caused 9/11 nothing will sway you I am sure.

As the US DoJ stated no one would be prosecuted, any attempt would be kidnapping and a violation of the American Service-Members' Protection Act (ASPA, Title 2 of Pub.L. 107–206, aka Invade the Hague act.

If, we read of a granny tranny attempting this armed with the only weapon heshe is permitted to own because of mental capabilities -- a supersoaker, we will know Priss is no more. 

Yes, Fox news recently interviewed former VP **** Cheney on the recently released Senate report on torture. and the subject of former POTUS George W. Bush came up. Fox host, Bret Baier, asked if perhaps certain agencies did not make Bush aware of the types of torture being used to interrogate prisoners. That when ‘Cheney throws Bush under the bus on torture program.’ That’s how Catherine Thompson of Talking Points delightfully phrased it. Here is how Cheney responds to accusations that Bush was kept in the dark:

“Not true. Didn’t happen,” Cheney responded. “Read his book, he talks about it extensively in his memoirs. He was in fact an integral part of the program, he had to approve it before we went forward with it.”

 

Cheney gets a little more cutting as he admits to what he earlier called ‘crap':

“The notion that the committee’s trying to peddle, that somehow the agency was operating on a rogue basis, and we weren’t being told or the President wasn’t being told, is just a flat out lie,” he later added.

Flat out lie? How ironic that his would come from one of the most corrupt and evil politicians in American history. I rarely use the word hate to personally describe how I feel about someone. But my spirituality gets lost and fused when it comes to **** Cheney. The man is responsible for torturing other human beings, for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians (men, women and children), and for the deaths of thousands of American troops. To top it off, he made over $36 billion in profits from a war he started. The man should not be walking free, much less have a say on any national issue. Seeing him behind bars is on my life’s bucket list. I know I’m not alone. He must be one of the most hated politicians this country, and the world, has ever seen. Even students, some born before the Iraq War, are protesting him.

**** Cheney will pay for his evil deeds one day. If not in this life, in another.  He goes against everything that’s good and just in this world. Cheney defies the human spirit. He will pay.

Prissy442,

If it wasn't for your penchant for reducing everything to Dem vs. Rep with the Rep responsible for everything evil and Dems responsible for everything good  you might have some credibility. No person or party is right 100% of the time. 

The only one who should be arrested is the traitorous coward in the white house who calls himself the "president".

Mikus, remember, over half the voters chose him two times(not like the one before)

--------------

Funny water boarding is frowned on but no one bats a eye when the Obama administration takes out people with drones - some even U.S. Citizens.   Me thinks the "outrage" is political.   

Farley, if a US citizen is in company with the ISIS, they ought to be took out

---------------

I wonder who history will be kinder to after the fog of politics clears; a president who did all he could to get past congress to protect Americans and the rest of the civilized world or one who cozies up to state sponsors of terrorism like Iran and leaves the back door of our borders open?

Stanky, it depends on whether the history book is real or fiction

----------------

Bulldog, how many spent years in Gitmo that weren't terrorists when we locked them up? Do we know they are terrorists or just some Arab saying anything to get the treatment to stop?

Those taken prisoner should be treated at illegal combatants per the Geneva convention.  Hold a military hearing -- were prisoners caught bearing arms -- Yes.  Were they in recognizable uniforms or wearing identifiable insignia -- No.  Good, hang them.  

Those taken prisoner should be treated at illegal combatants per the Geneva convention.  Hold a military hearing -- were prisoners caught bearing arms -- Yes.  Were they in recognizable uniforms or wearing identifiable insignia -- No.  Good, hang them.  

Speak to the WWII vets that got rescued from German and Japanese POW camps about hanging POW's.

Conservatives had much rather be seen as lunatics driven by evil intent regarding the simplest behavior.  They would invent some punishment for helping some elderly person across a street.

__________________________________________________________________----

The various conventions agreed to in Geneva delineated the treatment of combatants.  Combatants under arms, but not wearing uniforms or recognizable insignia are not subject to protection under those treaties.  Like spies who operate in mufti (civilian clothing) they are subject to execution upon being apprehended and their status verified.  

"According to Article 4 of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949, irregular forces are entitled to prisoner of war status provided that they are commanded by a person responsible for his subordinates, have a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance, carry arms openly, and conduct their operations in accordance with the laws and customs of war. If they do not do meet all of these, they may be considered francs-tireurs (in the original sense of "illegal combatant") and punished as criminals in a military jurisdiction, which may include summary execution."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...soners_of_war_status

I had a close relative who nearly died of mistreatment.  The stalag commandant was later tried and executed by the allies.  

JT. I suggest you check before posting. Heard enough from barracks lawyers in the army. For the last 40 years, I've dealt with real lawyers, who knew what they were talking about.  

Al Qaeda relinquished most protection under the Geneva convention when they attacked the US on 9/11.  Subsequently, they continued to operate without identifying by wearing uniforms or insignia.  ISIS- pretty much thee same, plus they violate the Geneva convention by their treatment of captured soldiers and civilians,  

The left desires to treat them like poor misunderstood waifs, instead of the blood thirsty monsters they are.  

Our granny tranny, Priss, made a post that included this "To top it off, he made over $36 billion in profits from a war he started."  A check of the hyperlink shows this was the what Hallliburton was reportedly paid.  As Chaney divested himself of their stock before he became VP, that is a false statement. I expect no less from Priss,  

______________________________________________

As a reminder, none of the treatment of prisoners in the Senate report was done at Gitmo.  So, JT, the number would be zero.

As a reminder, none of the treatment of prisoners in the Senate report was done at Gitmo.  So, JT, the number would be zero.

None that you know of. How many at Gitmo was not terrorists when we locked them up?

---------------------

Any American citizen who aligns with ISIS should be treated just like Arab ISIS members

------------

Al Qaeda relinquished most protection under the Geneva convention when they attacked the US on 9/11. 

Did we invade Iraq on lies and distortions?

JT. I suggest you check before posting. Heard enough from barracks lawyers in the army. For the last 40 years, I've dealt with real lawyers, who knew what they were talking about.  

Dire, To the best of my knowledge, there is one congressperson who has been a prisoner of war. He speaks out against torture. Is he the only republican to do so? He is the only one who has experienced torture. As for dealing with real lawyers who knew what they were talking about concerning POW torture, I didn't know that was the normal subject for finances. Is that how bookkeeping in Atlanta is done.

_________________________________________________

Really poor example of deflection -- the subject is Al Qaeda and the treatment of such.  

___________________________________________________________

JT, you're slipping! The subject is not torture, but whether Al Qaeda and ISIS members taken prisoner are subject to full protection of the Geneva conference treaties.  Protected against torture (not the subject) --yes.  Protected against execution after a hearing determines they are illegal combatants -- NO!

My reference to lawyers is that they know what they are speaking of (their knowledge of accounting fraud, isn't), when it comes to the law.  Your claims about illegal combatant treatment proves nil -- barracks or jail house lawyer. 

JT, you're slipping! The subject is not torture, but whether Al Qaeda and ISIS members taken prisoner are subject to full protection of the Geneva conference treaties.  Protected against torture (not the subject) 

--------------

Maybe I am, this is the first paragraph on this subject;

Now that the report on torture of prisoners has been released should Republicans who knowingly supported the Bush/ Chaney criminals be arrested and charged with accessories to war crimes?

What about the demos who knew also???

Throw the book at all of them.  I have never suggested that democrats are all innocent.