Pelosi calls for review of National Security Act -- the one that CREATED the CIA!

[bottomtheweaver]

:wow:

Could this be Pelosi's shot across the bow to the heart of the GOP's untouchable surveillance, propaganda and assassination outift? From the end of her prepared statement at press conference on Thursday, as reported by the WaPo:

"Congress and the administration must review -- I've always believed the Congress and the administration must review the National Security Act of 1947 -- now, we have a chance to do that with a new president -- to determine in a larger number of members of Congress should receive classified briefings so that the information can be utilized by proper oversight -- for proper oversight and legislative activity without violating oaths of secrecy."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/14/AR2009051402100.html

Miss Nancy, you GO!!! :headbang:

[DCKit]

1. A shot across the bow with a flaming arrow, to boot.

The CIA and the fascists will start howling about how more Congress critters in the know will only result in more leaks of sensitive information. How else to force them to comply with the law if not the threat of disclosure?

Personally, I'd like to see the CIA's chain yanked to the point of whiplash. It's been too long since anyone stood up to them or spanked them properly.

[Hekate]

2. KnR. In the times we find ourselves living in, everything is at stake. nt

[Kaleko]

3. Now that her own political survival seems to be at stake,

let's see how hard Ms Nancy will fight for what's right.

LOL.

[jgraz]

6. My prediction: she'll fight exactly as hard as necessary to keep her job

And not one molecule more.

[bottomtheweaver]

13. That would be plenty.

Taking out Dem House speakers is a trick the GOP is very good at. I hope she has better luck than Tip O'Neill and Tom Foley, and since it looks like she's ready to throw the CIA and the rest of the torture gang under the bus to save her hide, I say bring it on!

[ColbertWatcher]

4. I find it odd that given that she made these statments at a press conference, yet ...

... there are no photos of the event.

I've checked the usual suspects (Yahoo! News and DayLife.com) which show file photos, but non e from the actual event.

WTF!?

[JDPriestly]

7. I think I heard these remarks in this press conference. Not sure though.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x312807

[bottomtheweaver]

12. Here's a link to a 6-minute Politico video of highlights

of Thursday's press conference, which doesn't have the part I quoted above but has a few other choice bits. Basically Pelosi says several times in several ways that the Bush admin and CIA lied repeatedly, including these:

"So -- so let's get this straight. The Bush administration has conceived a policy, the CIA comes to the Congress, withholds information about the timing and the use of this subject. They -- we later find out that it had been taking place before they even briefed us about the legal opinions and told us that they were not being used.

"This is a tactic, a diversionary tactic to take the spotlight off of those who conceived, developed and implemented these policies, which all of us long opposed. . . .

"at every step of the way, the administration was misleading the Congress. . . .

"They mislead us all the time. . . . But what's the point? Yes, they did. They misrepresented every step of the way."

http://www.politico.com/singletitlevideo.html?bcpid=1155201977&bctid=23165771001

If that doesn't load, it's embedded in this story:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22531.html

Well worth watching!

[ColbertWatcher]

17. Yeah, I snagged a screengrab from one of them.

I just can't believe there were no pictures.

[bottomtheweaver]

20. Here's a couple from BBC, CTV, and NYT:

[ColbertWatcher]

21. Thank you. Here's my pic ...

[JDPriestly]

5. I thought I heard her say that. Fifth recommendation and proud to do it.

We need to encourage her to hold public hearings on this. Congress needs the power to oversee the CIA more freely. Presidents should not be able to use the CIA or the NSA as their private spy operation. These agencies should strictly serve the interest of all of the American people. The CIA was, to some extent, formed a sort of American aristocracy out of the Ivy League schools. I think that has changed to some extent, but there should be a lot more transparency not necessarily about specific CIA operations, but about the kinds of activities they may be requested to do. We can't have rogue organizations that operate outside American law or feel free to violate American and international law as they wish. To harbor a lawless agency within the executive branch and bar Congress from overseeing it effectively undermines our Constitution.

[ColbertWatcher]

22. "To harbor a lawless agency within the executive branch and ..."

"... bar Congress from overseeing it effectively undermines our Constitution."

QFT

If the GOP want to continue to break the law, let them hire their mercenaries.

[bottomtheweaver]

29. Thank you. I believe this is an intensely important issue.

An astonishing amount of lawlessness, and not just in the last administration, can be laid at the feet of the CIA and the rest of the intel shadow government, and watching the current administration unfold as a virtual replay of the last one makes me think its power is even greater than we know. And they don't make it easy to know much. I also believe the whole concept of a domestic peacetime intel apparatus is grossly unconstitutional, and certainly illegal, and not only needs to be reviewed but abolished. Furthermore, the victims of its crimes need to be compensated, and the perps must be brought to justice and fully prosecuted under the laws of the US and its treaties.

[Canuckistanian]

8. Great idea!

And they can START by reviewing the CIA's huge budget.

[Echo In Light]

9. L O N G overdue...provided it isn't merely going through motions

[frogcycle]

10. As all this shit unfolds, Cheney's choice to build his house

2000 feet from CIA hq gets creepier and creepier

http://wonkette.com/363302/cheneys-new-house-is-cia-adjacent


The whole thing stinks. The Agency has of course accomplished good, important things on behalf of the country, and employs thousands of dedicated patriotic citizens. That said, it has always been on the edge or over the edge, and has had little or no constraint on its "black ops," some of which are probably justified and some of which are probably rambos getting their jollies. Cheney found some folks there who liked his style. Now they are circling the wagons.

Hell, if Pelosi can be criticized for perhaps knowing some of what they were doing and not speaking up, how the hell can those in the CIA now covering for their cronies not be criticized?

[WhiteTara]

11. good job Nancy

glad she is fighting now. Too bad she waited so long. It seems it always has to get personal for politicians to do anything; even though their stated reason for being in government is to REPRESENT the people. Yikes.

[alarimer]

14. Good. The CIA is rotten through and through.

They always have been.

[Bluerthanblue]

15. A fricken MEN Nancy- long past time for a review-

"sunshine is the best disinfectant".

[Aragorn]

16. and the DEA

and any corrupt agency used against the people rather than for the people. I am holding my breath for this to happen.

[kentuck]

18. Yeah sure !

The spineless bastards, who are supposed to be representing us, the people, let the CIA come into secret briefings and agree with the CIA stipulations that they cannot take notes or have any historical record of the meetings. They kiss the feet of these lying bastards. Review? Grow a fucking spine first.

[Vidar]

19. Damn. I actually agree with Pelosi on something.

[Solly Mack]

23. and it should be

and should have been a long time ago

[azul]

24. Bout time. This agency is too secret and lawless.

It has created more enemies abroad and hatred of the US than anything beneficial it could have done justifies.

[bottomtheweaver]

25. I completely agree. Everything about it is depraved.

That's not to say there aren't good people working for the CIA and the rest of the security apparatus, but its 62 history has been a bizarre and horrifying litany of clandestine operations conducted for the benefit of oil companies, weapons manufacturers, and other corporate predators, and the world knows it. No surprise that it's been closely tied to the Bush family from its founding, and no surprise that it recruited German Nazis to help carry out its lawless depraved crimes. That's why Hugo Chavez was calling Bush Satan a couple of years back at the UN and he wasn't far off the mark.

[Beam Me Up]

26. Whose "national security" is being protected?

Is it the "national security" of the American people -- or the "national security" of the interests of a very wealthy and powerful elite? One might think these two things would coincide, that what is in the interest of one will be in the interest of the other. But is that in fact the case? I believe recent history shows us quite clearly that this is a myth and these "interests" often conflict. So this raises a more important question, can "national security" be used as a blanket to hide criminality on both a domestic and international level?

I support Pelosi in opening this question.

[Raster]

27. "Is it the "national security" of the American people -- or the "national security" of...

...the interests of a very wealthy and powerful elite?"

Go Nancy, go. Do the RIGHT THING this time.

[Echo In Light]

31. In re to your question: American populace, or the very wealthy - the latter, 100%

[Wednesdays]

28. K&R

:kick:

[Beam Me Up]

30. kick

[merh]

32. I applaud her for this

and I say that she and anyone else that may have been informed of the torture, that ordered the torture, authorized the torture or that committed the act be investigated and charged if the evidence shows they violated the laws of this nation.

No one is above the law, no matter what party they belong to. No matter what office they held.