On Tuesday, in a New York Times article on President-elect Barack Obama’s search for a CIA director, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) was quoted in a manner that suggested she embraced “flexibility” in terms of allowing torture in interrogations. The comments by Feinstein, who will take over as chairwoman of the Senate Intelligence Committee in January, worried opponents of torture. But Feinstein’s staff tells Spencer Ackerman that the paper cut out a crucial sentence from her statement. Here’s Feinstein’s full statement with the excised sentence highlighted:
“The law must reflect a single, clear standard across the government, and right now the best choice appears to be the Army Field Manual,” Senator Feinstein said. “I recognize that there are other views, and I am willing to work with the new Administration to consider them. However, my intent is to pass a law that effectively bans torture, complies with all laws and treaties, and provides a single standard across the government.”
TLDR
December 4th, 2008 at 12:10 pmWhat, is Judy Miller an editor now?
¶ AIO
December 4th, 2008 at 12:11 pmHow did I wake up in a country where we have to debate the nature of torture as a “right” or “wrong”?
December 4th, 2008 at 12:12 pmConservatives can win with the truth.
Apparently, they also can’t sell newspapers with it either…
December 4th, 2008 at 12:13 pmcannot win
December 4th, 2008 at 12:14 pmDNFP Says:
How did I wake up in a country where we have to debate the nature of torture as a “right” or “wrong”?
____________
Funny, innit? The wingnuttery are always decrying the “moral relativism” of libruls but now that the thumbscrew is on the the other hand, we somehow all need to keep an open mind and entertain the possibility that torture really isn’t torture as long as we do it, and for the right reasons too.
Charming… but Heaven forbid you should say “Happy Holidays” instead of…
December 4th, 2008 at 12:17 pmI must have missed something along the line.
December 4th, 2008 at 12:18 pmWasn’t torture already ‘effectively banned’ by law along time ago ?
Oh, that LIBERAL MEDIA rag did that…Karl Rove was helping edit the piece, it seems.
December 4th, 2008 at 12:18 pmIs the NYT trying to tempt Murdoch into buying them?
December 4th, 2008 at 12:19 pmA great example of when “All the news that’s fit to print” becomes “Fair and balanced”.
December 4th, 2008 at 12:20 pmKeith H. Says:
I must have missed something along the line.
Wasn’t torture already ‘effectively banned’ by law along time ago ?
It was until King George decided he was above the law.
December 4th, 2008 at 12:31 pmCan someone tell me why the Right constantly rags on the NYT as “liberal”? Far from it…
http://www.sunstateactivist.org/ssablog/
December 4th, 2008 at 12:35 pmThis from the same woman who supported Mukasey, who has repeatedly ignored or refused to investigate torturers?
December 4th, 2008 at 12:38 pmDianne, quit, you’re torturing me!
When you’re ranked #36 for press freedom, you don’t continue to provide examples for why you should’ve ranked higher…
The US media is a corporate joke that will kill the internet any way they can.
December 4th, 2008 at 12:57 pmDiFink, as Zimone points out, is the problem, not the solution. Christ on a cross, two of the worst Senators in our times, as chairs of the most important committees, Lieberman on Homeland Security (no hearings or oversight) and DiFink on Intel (exacerbated the problems we’re now facing in the world). The inmates are in charge of the asylum.
December 4th, 2008 at 1:11 pmDamn that librul media!!!!
December 4th, 2008 at 1:24 pmKeith H. Says:
I must have missed something along the line.
Wasn’t torture already ‘effectively banned’ by law along time ago ?
A hundred years ago we prosecuted some of our own soldiers for waterboarding prisoners in the Philippines.
We tried and convicted a Japanese Officer for waterboarding our soldiers after WW2.
I would say the legal precedent has already been set and the argument over whether or not waterboarding is illegal and a war crime is just plain stupid. It has been illegal well over a hundred years in this country.
December 4th, 2008 at 1:37 pmFeinstein is a veteran politician and should have known better than to put the REAL meaning of her statement to the press at end of a conjunction! The press cannot keep their attention for that long.
I know it sounds petty. But one must NOT expect anything more than that sort of treatment from the press. They are lazy and looking for any angle to show drama or drive their narrative.
Shame on her AND the NYT.
December 4th, 2008 at 2:08 pmQuoting out of context – kind of like a lot of folks do from the Bible.
And if you remove the 3rd, 5th and 6th letters from the title, the Reader’s Digest is Really shown to be the Red’s Digest. –Col. Flagg on M*A*S*H
December 4th, 2008 at 3:34 pmNow why in hell would the New York Times do something so deceptive. They had started to sound rather fair and balanced in the last couple of years. Are they going back to Judith Miller land?
December 4th, 2008 at 4:09 pmThe New York Times is like most other corporate media in the United States. They stand for little anymore. The reason newspapers are dying is not only because of the net. But because they have lost objectivity, they are inaccurate, they cover mostly trivia. And even when they cover something important, the follow through is nearly non existent. Or as a tiny paragraph in the middle of the paper.
They pontificate and like most news and the people that speak for the various news entities, they are all mostly hot air. The media in this country is usually wrong, and way behind what the rest of us think and know. They breathe the air of politics and listen to their own rhetoric and opinions. And most often they are wrong, wrong, wrong.
The press in the US has gone from number one in the world for free and objective to number 50 and dropping. The number one press in the world in now in the Netherlands. I get most of my news from out of this country. Even things relating to this country.
Feinstein is my Senator. In California she is called the female Joe Liberman. I cannot bear her. It difficult to misquote her, but in this case they did.
December 4th, 2008 at 11:04 pm