Porter the Slack-Jawed Yokel

Here come all the little piggies to squeal and grunt their justifications for abetting crimes against humanity.  Today’s entrant: Porter Goss, former Republican Congressman (1989-2004), Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee (1997-2004), and Director of the CIA (2004-2006).  He oinks his “recollections” in yesterday’s Washington Post:

— The chairs and the ranking minority members of the House and Senate intelligence committees, known as the Gang of Four, were briefed that the CIA was holding and interrogating high-value terrorists.

— We understood what the CIA was doing.

— We gave the CIA our bipartisan support.

— We gave the CIA funding to carry out its activities.

— On a bipartisan basis, we asked if the CIA needed more support from Congress to carry out its mission against al-Qaeda.

Well come on then, let’s see those memos too!  Goss’ argument that Democrats knew about it, therefore we should call off the “partisan” witchhunt, is akin to the police chief arguing that, because the whole precinct knew about the corruption, there should be no outside investigation/prosecutions.  I couldn’t care less. In fact, his accusations only inflame my desire for greater independent inquiry. What did they know and when did they know it? Name and shame! If you think you can implicate the Democratic leadership, more power to you!

As Glenn Greenwald notes, these fools still think this is about partisan politics, rather than gross abuses of the unitary executive.  More from Goss:

Today, I am slack-jawed to read that members claim to have not understood that the techniques on which they were briefed were to actually be employed; or that specific techniques such as “waterboarding” were never mentioned. It must be hard for most Americans of common sense to imagine how a member of Congress can forget being told about the interrogations of Sept. 11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed. In that case, though, perhaps it is not amnesia but political expedience.

Your goddamn right it’s political expedience.  Anyone proud to say they sat through a meeting that detailed America’s torture regime without speaking out against it is a cowardly pee-pants, afraid of their own shadow.  Or didn’t you know that, Cletis?

As Josh Marshall notes, these punks are so proud of their torture program, that they’re terrified to say the word.  (I did a CTRL+F on Goss’ piece just to make sure – no “torture”).  Just say it: “sometimes you have to torture prisoners in the interests of national security”.  But they won’t do it, because they know then it is game over.  Watch Newt Gingrich make an ass of himself over this:


And it’s like that with all the torture apologists.  (In fact, Obama’s people even quit saying the word, because the next logical question is, “why don’t you support investigations of that [universally acknowledged and reviled] crime?”)

Getting back to Goss – one other thing I noticed about his article: dude focuses entirely on the time period that he was a congressman, nary a word about what took place while he was CIA Director…

Curious, that.

I can only presume that the congressional era is the one for which he feels he can best defend his actions.  How much do you care to bet that his was not the principled voice of opposition that shut down the torture program?  Any takers?  Once more from Goss:

Since leaving my post as CIA director almost three years ago, I have remained largely silent on the public stage. I am speaking out now because I feel our government has crossed the red line between properly protecting our national security and trying to gain partisan political advantage. We can’t have a secret intelligence service if we keep giving away all the secrets. Americans have to decide now.

Easy decision, pee-pants.