TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- I think I'm in love ...
I think I'm in love ...
Old and busted - 
New hotness - 
Just look at him work:
| quote: |
White House Briefing: McClellan Deflects Questions on Torture Exemption A Couple Dozen Times By E&P Staff Published: November 08, 2005 NEW YORK At today's White House press briefing, Scott McClellan was hit with a number of questions about the "ethics classes" the president's staffers are now attending. But much of the briefing featured efforts by Helen Thomas, at the start, and then other reporters to get McClellan to explain the apparent contradiction between his claims that the U.S. does not torture anyone and Vice President Cheney's request for an exemption in this matter. Here are the exchanges from the transcript: * Q I'd like you to clear up, once and for all, the ambiguity about torture. Can we get a straight answer? The President says we don't do torture, but Cheney -- MR. McCLELLAN: That's about as straight as it can be. Q Yes, but Cheney has gone to the Senate and asked for an exemption on -- MR. McCLELLAN: No, he has not. Are you claiming he's asked for an exemption on torture? No, that's -- Q He did not ask for that? MR. McCLELLAN: -- that is inaccurate. Q Are you denying everything that came from the Hill, in terms of torture? MR. McCLELLAN: No, you're mischaracterizing things. And I'm not going to get into discussions we have -- Q Can you give me a straight answer for once? MR. McCLELLAN: Let me give it to you, just like the President has. We do not torture. He does not condone torture and he would never -- Q I'm asking about exemptions. MR. McCLELLAN: Let me respond. And he would never authorize the use of torture. We have an obligation to do all that we can to protect the American people. We are engaged -- Q That's not the answer I'm asking for -- MR. McCLELLAN: It is an answer -- because the American people want to know that we are doing all within our power to prevent terrorist attacks from happening. There are people in this world who want to spread a hateful ideology that is based on killing innocent men, women and children. We saw what they can do on September 11th -- Q He didn't ask for an exemption -- MR. McCLELLAN: -- and we are going to -- Q -- answer that one question. I'm asking, is the administration asking for an exemption? MR. McCLELLAN: I am answering your question. The President has made it very clear that we are going to do -- Q You're not answering -- yes or no? MR. McCLELLAN: No, you don't want the American people to hear what the facts are, Helen, and I'm going to tell them the facts. Q -- the American people every day. I'm asking you, yes or no, did we ask for an exemption? MR. McCLELLAN: And let me respond. You've had your opportunity to ask the question. Now I'm going to respond to it. Q If you could answer in a straight way. MR. McCLELLAN: And I'm going to answer it, just like the President -- I just did, and the President has answered it numerous times. Q -- yes or no -- MR. McCLELLAN: Our most important responsibility is to protect the American people. We are engaged in a global war against Islamic radicals who are intent on spreading a hateful ideology, and intent on killing innocent men, women and children. Q Did we ask for an exemption? MR. McCLELLAN: We are going to do what is necessary to protect the American people. Q Is that the answer? MR. McCLELLAN: We are also going to do so in a way that adheres to our laws and to our values. We have made that very clear. The President directed everybody within this government that we do not engage in torture. We will not torture. He made that very clear. Q Are you denying we asked for an exemption? MR. McCLELLAN: Helen, we will continue to work with the Congress on the issue that you brought up. The way you characterize it, that we're asking for exemption from torture, is just flat-out false, because there are laws that are on the books that prohibit the use of torture. And we adhere to those laws. Q We did ask for an exemption; is that right? I mean, be simple -- this is a very simple question. MR. McCLELLAN: I just answered your question. The President answered it last week. Q What are we asking for? Q Would you characterize what we're asking for? MR. McCLELLAN: We're asking to do what is necessary to protect the American people in a way that is consistent with our laws and our treaty obligations. And that's what we -- Q Why does the CIA need an exemption from the military? MR. McCLELLAN: David, let's talk about people that you're talking about who have been brought to justice and captured. You're talking about people like Khalid Shaykh Muhammad; people like Abu Zubaydah. Q I'm asking you -- MR. McCLELLAN: No, this is facts about what you're talking about. Q Why does the CIA need an exemption from rules that would govern the conduct of our military in interrogation practices? MR. McCLELLAN: There are already laws and rules that are on the books, and we follow those laws and rules. What we need to make sure is that we are able to carry out the war on terrorism as effectively as possible, not only -- Q What does that mean -- MR. McCLELLAN: What I'm telling you right now -- not only to protect Americans from an attack, but to prevent an attack from happening in the first place. And, you bet, when we capture terrorist leaders, we are going to seek to find out information that will protect -- that prevent attacks from happening in the first place. But we have an obligation to do so. Our military knows this; all people within the United States government know this. We have an obligation to do so in a way that is consistent with our laws and values. Now, the people that you are bringing up -- you're talking about in the context, and I think it's important for the American people to know, are people like Khalid Shaykh Muhammad, Abu Zubaydah, Ramzi Binalshibh -- these are -- these are dangerous killers. Q So they're all killers -- Q Did you ask for an exemption on torture? That's a simple question, yes or no. MR. McCLELLAN: No. And we have not. That's what I told you at the beginning. Q You want to reserve the ability to use tougher tactics with those individuals who you mentioned. MR. McCLELLAN: Well, obviously, you have a different view from the American people. I think the American people understand the importance of doing everything within our power and within our laws to protect the American people. Q Scott, are you saying that Cheney did not ask -- Q What is it that you want the -- what is it that you want the CIA to be able to do that the U.S. Armed Forces are not allowed to do? MR. McCLELLAN: I'm not going to get into talking about national security matters, Bill. I don't do that, because this involves -- Q This would be the exemption, in other words. MR. McCLELLAN: This involves information that relates to doing all we can to protect the American people. And if you have a different view -- obviously, some of you on this room -- in this room have a different view, some of you on the front row have a different view. Q We simply are asking a question. Q What is the Vice President -- what is the Vice President asking for? MR. McCLELLAN: It's spelled out in our statement of administration policy in terms of what our views are. That's very public information. In terms of our discussions with members of Congress -- Q -- no, it's not -- MR. McCLELLAN: In terms of our members -- like I said, there are already laws on the books that we have to adhere to and abide by, and we do. And we believe that those laws and those obligations address these issues. Q So then why is the Vice President continuing to lobby on this issue? If you're very happy with the laws on the books, what needs change? MR. McCLELLAN: Again, you asked me -- you want to ask questions of the Vice President's office, feel free to do that. We've made our position very clear, and it's spelled out on our website for everybody to see. Q We don't need a website, we need you from the podium. MR. McCLELLAN: And what I just told you is what our view is. Q But Scott, do you see the contradiction -- MR. McCLELLAN: Jessica, go ahead. http://www.editorandpublisher.com/e...t_id=1001436211 |
I love your sarcasm.
Why do I get the feeling that this guy eats too much? Must be the double chin. Go easy on the mayo, pal, and don't put too much bacon on that BLT.
Haha, and his hands are so funny. Like out of proportion. Man, I'm telling you, this guy is a closeted metrosexual. Just look at that air of delicate finesse he has about him. LOL! One more gesture and it'll be "Talk to the hand."
Oh wow that was priceless!!!
I like this guy. Think he has potential.
I love how reporters try to fill their own agenda but asking leading questions... 
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Fir3start3r I love how reporters try to fill their own agenda but asking leading questions... |
My god are you indoctrinated!
| quote: |
| Originally posted by shaolin_Z My god are you indoctrinated! |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Fir3start3r Why? Because he didn't say yes or no to a leading question? |
Here's Cheney's proposal:
| quote: |
The proposal, which two sources said Vice President Cheney handed last Thursday to Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) in the company of CIA Director Porter J. Goss, states that the measure barring inhumane treatment shall not apply to counterterrorism operations conducted abroad or to operations conducted by "an element of the United States government" other than the Defense Department. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...5102402051.html |
Whats the problem?
"...states that the measure barring inhumane treatment shall not apply..."
That doesn't sound like asking for anything to me, more like a statement...
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Fir3start3r Whats the problem? "...states that the measure barring inhumane treatment shall not apply..." That doesn't sound like asking for anything to me, more like a statement... |
Yes, I'm deducing based on semantics but the answer must be there if McCLELLAN is saying they've already answered the question no?
How is that illogical?
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Fir3start3r Yes, I'm deducing based on semantics but the answer must be there if McCLELLAN is saying they've already answered the question no? How is that illogical? |
Well, instead of splitting hairs on the press conference, here's a little more info abeit not much...
Still sounds like they want an exemption to me?
Anybody find anything else on the matter?
| quote: |
The White House initially tried to kill the anti-torture provision while it was pending in the Senate, then switched course to lobby for an exemption in cases of "clandestine counterterrorism operations conducted abroad, with respect to terrorists who are not citizens of the United States." The president would have to approve the exemption, and Defense Department personnel could not be involved. In addition, any activity would have to be consistent with the Constitution, federal law and U.S. treaty obligations, according to draft changes in the exemption the White House is seeking. |
Well...here we are...a copy of the actual waiver...
It's pretty conclusive he's looking for an exemption now doesn't it?
While it's true the press secrutary isn't anwering the question in front of him, I think the answer is quite obvious.
What the reporter should have been asking is, is this waiver a backdoor should the U.S. determine that torture is needed to ensure the protection of it's people?
That would have been a more logical question...
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Fir3start3r While it's true the press secrutary isn't anwering the question in front of him, I think the answer is quite obvious. |
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Fir3start3r What the reporter should have been asking is, is this waiver a backdoor should the U.S. determine that torture is needed to ensure the protection of it's people? That would have been a more logical question... |
What can we say?
He's the Press Secretary and it's his job to handle the press.
I'm sure this isn't the first time he's skirted direct questions so is it really that surprising?
They figured they answered the question.
They don't condone torture so long as it's not a national security risk.
If they actually say that though, they'd be no different than any other countries that have much worse records and are known for torturing.
Of course, one could argue that the very existance of the waiver precludes innocence...
| quote: |
| Originally posted by Fir3start3r Well...here we are...a copy of the actual waiver... It's pretty conclusive he's looking for an exemption now doesn't it? While it's true the press secrutary isn't anwering the question in front of him, I think the answer is quite obvious. What the reporter should have been asking is, is this waiver a backdoor should the U.S. determine that torture is needed to ensure the protection of it's people? That would have been a more logical question... |
Good idea. This is now Scott McClellan appreciation week.
Jump on the bandwagon everyone!
LOL!
Now he just needs a baret...
Photochop time! 
What like this?
By the way, this was penned by Helen Thomas ... the reporter badgering him to just answer the goddamned question:
| quote: |
White House spokesman no help to media By HELEN THOMAS HEARST NEWSPAPERS WASHINGTON -- Presidential press secretary Scott McClellan says he can be trusted. But I don't think he should take a poll in the White House press room on that claim. He might lose. McClellan has lived up to his self-described role as an "advocate" for President Bush. It's only recently that he admits to wearing another hat -- one that is obligatory, as he put it -- that requires him "to make sure the American people are getting an accurate account of what is going on here in Washington." That will be the day. Unfortunately, the record shows otherwise. McClellan might be forgiven for declaring from the White House lectern two years ago that Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff Lewis "Scooter" Libby and deputy chief of staff Karl Rove had told him that they were not involved in leaking to the media that war critic Joseph Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, worked for the CIA. As it turns out, both men were involved in one way or another in getting that information out. Libby was indicted on several charges including perjury and obstruction of justice in connection with the federal investigation of the Plame leak case. Rove is under investigation. McClellan is not about to finger his colleagues by accusing them of misleading him. But he has a lot more to answer for -- especially in carrying out the administration's battle plan of pumping up the case for war with Iraq with fibs. The most blatant among the falsehoods has been the constant attempt to link the 9/11 attacks to Saddam Hussein, even after the president conceded that there was no connection. More recently, McClellan sang the praises of the hapless White House counsel Harriet Miers, who was named to a vacancy on the Supreme Court and then sacrificed to Bush's right-wing supporters who blasted the nomination. Day after day, McClellan spoke of Miers' "unique" qualifications for the high bench. He stopped that pitch right after her appointment was pulled. His technique when briefing White House reporters boils down to "the best defense is offense," and he uses it when the going gets tough. I used to get phone calls from television viewers asking why I posed such tough questions to the powers that be. Now I get calls -- and I presume other members of the media do, too -- denouncing the "softball" questions they hear during news briefings. McClellan was recently asked about a news story that a wounded veteran of the Iraq war was getting dunned by a bill collection agency for armor and other items he bought to go to war. McClellan's response was that the president often visits wounded members of the military at Walter Reed Hospital. The reporter let that answer pass without pushing the envelope. Obviously, McClellan is on a short leash and comes into the press briefing room with one page of scribbled notes. He does not dare deviate from his prepared answers, no matter what the question, and his responses tend to be robotic. As a result, fewer reporters are showing up at the White House unless they are alerted that it will be a big news day. McClellan is attuned to the headlines of the day, but he has developed his own style of evasion, often ignoring a question and turning to another reporter. It worked in the early years of the Bush administration which had a roll-over-and-play-dead press corps to deal with. But lately, White House reporters have become more challenging, more skeptical. McClellan recently announced to the press corps that he had "faithfully carried out his duties and responsibilities." Maybe so, from the White House viewpoint. But as far as reporters are concerned, his answers leave a lot to be desired. http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opini...21_helen11.html |
Perhaps the reporters should consider torturing Mr. McClellan to get some answers. It should be the next step if he continues to avoid simple questions.
^^
thank fvck for that. until that post ive felt nothing but intense annoyance. yep, i say we torture him. but lets do it all vader-like and NOT ask him any questions (esp since we know the answers 
)
i hate shit like that, it irritates the fvck out of me.
*irritated* 
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.