Does anyone know if that piece of shit, John A. Rizzo, got out of committee or not?

[Solly Mack]

CIA's Rizzo: Our Interrogations Were Humane, Except When They Weren't

"When Sen. Carl Levin (D-MI) asked Rizzo whether he thought in 2002 that the CIA's interrogation regime was "humane," Rizzo -- who was acting general counsel for much of the time, and took part in deliberations about the legality of that regime -- replied that "We believed then, and we believe throughout the process, that the CIA (interrogation) program as it was conceived -- that the procedures, and the criteria, when taken in toto, leads to the conclusion, justifies the conclusion, that it was from the outset, and (in its subsequent implementation) was conducted in a humane manner."

Yet the CIA, based in part on legal guidance delivered by the general counsel's office, authorized its interrogators to force detainees to stand for up to 40 hours; chill their cells to 50 degrees while dousing their naked bodies with cold water; and to simulate drowning them. Whether Rizzo actually believes such practices are humane, he conceded that "there had been some concerns that were expressed" by CIA interrogators who feared prosecution for carrying out the authorized interrogations."



For a fuller explanation of that "legal guidance", see this: The Pentagon Memo




I've read several articles regarding the hearing but have yet to find the answer to the burning question - Did the piece of shit make it out of committee? Does the scum-sucking enabler of war crimes get a vote in the full senate?


Thank you in advance.

[leftchick]

1. It appears he has a secret session before he goes to the house

but I do not hold out any hope. It seems that we continue to reward war criminals and torturers in this country regardless of who runs congress...

<snip>

Rizzo has been nominated to become general counsel of the agency. His nearly two-hour session before the Senate Intelligence Committee was a cautious affair. Few inquisitors asked barbed questions, and the man being questioned delivered answers noteworthy for their lack of detail.

Democrats on the committee, who spent years in the minority saying Republicans were muzzling them from asking tough questions about the Bush administration's most controversial policies since the Sept. 11 attacks, generally did not press Rizzo for details about the secret detention program of the intelligence agency.

Many of them promised to ask Rizzo tougher questions in a classified session after the open hearing.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/06/20/america/20terror.php

...promises promises. :grr:

[Solly Mack]

2. Great

and people will ask - and they'll be sincere in their asking (as unbelievable as that is) - how did it ever get this bad?

[leftchick]

3. I laid in bed this morning thinking the same thing Solly

I mean it is really, really bad. I think historically bad. I really worry for my children. :(

[Solly Mack]

4. It's horribly bad - and I agree, historically so

but I can't help but think that giving such people as Rizzo a pass directly contributes to just how bad it is now

It's a club where all the members give each other a pass for the most heinous of crimes ...and then they cloak it in a virtue.
(everyone deserves a second chance.)

or claim tradition

(a President deserves to pick who he wants) - no matter how criminal they are

[n2doc]

5. Yeah, but only for R's

When a D is the boss it is "hold everything up as much as we can"

[peacetalksforall]

6. People are going to wake up someday and realize the evil that is Sen.John Warner

and all the 'leaders' in the Senate and House that have taken his orders or bowed to his role in the WH war on human beings for what is under their feet.

[Solly Mack]

7. Warner is a piece of war crime enabling shit

and that's just my opinion on a polite day :)