Many Democrats oppose the CIA using ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ such as waterboarding. They say - in my opinion rightfully - that waterboarding is torture and, thus, outlawed (by, among others the Geneva Convention and the Declaration of Human Rights). Strangely, however, leading Democrats thought slightly differently about this matter back when George W. Bush was still enjoying high approval ratings.

When four members of Congress met “in secret for a first look at a unique CIA program designed to wring vital information from reticent terrorism suspects in U.S. custody” in 2002, they were given a virtual tour of “the CIA’s overseas detention sites and the harsh techniques interrogators had devised to try to make their prisoners talk.” One of the members of this small group? Nancy Pelosi.

Among the techniques CIA officers described to the group, and thus Pelosi, was waterboarding. And… no one objected. Nothing. Silence. For years. In fact, not only did no one object, two of the lawmakers present even asked whether “the methods were tough enough” and, if not, they asked the CIA to push harder.

All in all, “the CIA gave key legislative overseers about 30 private briefings, some of which included descriptions of that technique and other harsh interrogation methods, according to interviews with multiple U.S. officials with firsthand knowledge.” Only one person objected.

For those who are wondering: “The lawmakers who held oversight roles during the period included Pelosi and Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.) and Sens. Bob Graham (D-Fla.) and John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), as well as Rep. Porter J. Goss (R-Fla.) and Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan).”

One US official summarized the mood as follows: “In fairness, the environment was different then because we were closer to Sept. 11 and people were still in a panic. But there was no objecting, no hand-wringing. The attitude was, ‘We don’t care what you do to those guys as long as you get the information you need to protect the American people’.”

Does this mean that we can finally say that waterboarding receives bipartisan support?

Why yes.

And when did Democrats like Pelosi oppose waterboarding? When the public found out about it and objected to it.

The White House and the CIA have said for months that lawmakers were informed about the practices. But, until the Times published this article, we didn’t know what members of Congress knew what and when. Now we do.

And we can now also conclude that Pelosi at all are a bunch of hypocrites.

I oppose waterboarding because I believe it’s torture. I oppose Guantanamo Bay: it should be closed. But these lawmakers, these Democratic lawmakers who attacked and continue to attack Bush for waterboarding are, quite simply, hypocrites. They knew what was going on, but didn’t speak out about it. In fact, some even wondered whether waterboarding was tough enough.

As usual, the ones who have the “holier than thou” attitude are not holier, only “more hypocritical than thou.”

Jules Crittenden comments: “Yeah, well, that was a different time. Back when war was easier, less messy. Before polls suggested there was an advantage to stating that invading Iraq wasn’t a good idea any more. Before Bush lied, people got waterboarded … excuse me, I mean ‘died’.”

Also more at Charles Johnson’s place.

And at Wake Up America! where Susan writes:

For the record, we are not discussing waterboarding in this post, we are discussing the ugly, hypocritical nature of those with knowledge that waterboarding was being used, in 2002, said nothing, and still went on in 2005 to the present time to use it for political gain without coming clean on what they knew and when they knew it and the fact that at the time they never raised any objections.

The level of anger I am seeing on the left side of the aisle at their own politicians shows adequately, the hypocrisy is not going unnoticed, they are angry they were duped by their own representatives by being led to believe it was the administration alone that condone these activities, never giving hint at their own complicity.

Exactly. This particular news isn’t about whether or not waterboarding is torture (it is in my humble opinion, yeah, I couldn’t let that one go), it’s about the hypocritical behavior of the Democratic leadership.

Susan also links to some outraged posts at liberal blogs (and they’re right to be outraged):

- Corrente: ” Well, I guess now I know why impeachment was ‘off the table’.”

- Washington Monthly: “Bottom line: it looks like they all knew about it (Graham’s denial is unconvincing given that Harman, Pelosi, and Goss all admit they were briefed and Harman even wrote a formal letter of protest), and it looks like most of them didn’t have a problem with it. Another great day for the Republic.”

- The Carperbagger Report: “If lawmakers could perhaps elaborate now on what they knew, and when, it’d be very helpful — because it sounds as if they raised concerns about waterboarding after it made headlines in 2005, not before.”

- Liberal Values: “If the situation had been reversed, we know that the Republicans would have had no qualms about sticking to their principles (regardless of whether their principles are right or wrong) and would have pushed to oppose Democratic policies without regard for the political consequences. That is why they made a more effective opposition, and why they ultimately took control of the government for so many years despite lacking the ability to govern effectively.”

The problem is, of course, that waterboarding probably isn’t truly against the principles of Democrats like Pelosi. It’s only against her principles if and when the public opposes it.

Many more links at Wake Up America!