I am cautious about making a big deal regarding this issue. I actually think it might be a tactic by the liberals to use a bit of stealth and trickery to further their views. The reason I say this as it was also a trick used with Bush that caused many people to accept a liberal point of view based on a general reaction of the republicans in saying "Well you knew too".

What I mean is that the waterboarding and other enhanced techniques used were not illegal and were not torture. If though the republicans/conservatives adopt a position of attacking Pelosi on whether or not she was aware of the techniques then they are surrendering their view that it was not torture to one of "Well you knew too". What happens in many peoples minds is they see that the republicans no longer defend the act itself and instead try to accuse others of being aware of or committing the act also. This, in many peoples minds, makes the act wrong since even the original defenders of this act now use knowledge of this act to suggest wrongdoing. This was the same tactic the republicans mishandled regarding WMD's and the legality of going to war in Iraq.

I think people need to seriously consider what I just said and reflect back on Bush and how this same tactic caused such trouble to him. Instead stick to your guns and defend the enhanced interrogation as the legal and proper thing to have been done and leave it at that. To continue to attack Pelosi on this issue is to seemingly admit that they are right in that this was torture, I say seemingly as that is how most people will see it.

Think about it.

I am sort of off topic but your comment made me think about a joke that I found most honest and fitting. Well anyways here it is:

One day a group of scientists got together and decided that man had come a long way and no longer needed God. So they picked one scientist to go and tell Him that they were done with Him.

The scientist walked up to God and said, "God, we've decided that we no longer need you. We're to the point that we can clone people and do many miraculous things, so why don't you just go on and get lost."

God listened very patiently and kindly to the man and after the scientist was done talking, God said, "Very well, how about this, let's say we have a man making contest." To which the scientist replied, "OK, great!"

But God added, "Now, we're going to do this just like I did back in the old days with Adam starting with dirt."

The scientist said, "Sure, no problem" and bent down and grabbed himself a handful of dirt.

God just looked at him and said, "No, no, no. You go get your own dirt!"

I wasn't aware that it was the same guy, thats pretty interesting. I do recall it was all the rage for awhile but wasn't as dramatically exposed to the population as then it was only 3 tv stations and no Internet and the story didn't seem to have legs beyond a few scientific magazines and school classrooms. Still though many people my age who forgot about the 'ice age' scare recall it after I remind them to think back on it. I wonder if in 20 years the 'Al Gore' types will shift back to an 'ice age' scare, I have already noticed the change from using 'global warming' to now using 'climate change'.

Whenever I start to think about global warming I always reflect back to my youth in school where I was taught about the upcoming ice age (I am sure some of you recall this). I was expected to be afraid of global cooling then and more recently global warming. The experts were just as sure then as they are now and had a collection of data to support their arguments as well.

My conclusions is that science is still too ignorant in this matter and until they can pretty much pinpoint the weather forecast one year in advance I will not pay them much attention. Now I am against pollution and think it is something we should correct but not with the urgency of damaging our economy in doing it.

One thing I am confused of is that the 'Assault Weapons' ban is actually sort of an odd bit of legislation if you read up on it. I am sure that most people know that 'Assault Weapon' isn't a military term and actually as I understand the ban wording it is more of a cosmetic description of a weapons appearnce, and has nothing at all to do with the destructive or damage dealing capabilities of it.

That brings me to my point of how many of these weapons that did come from America and were found in Mexico were actually 'Assault Weapons' (according to the Ban) and not as I suspect 'Automatic Rifles' or 'Assault Rifles'. I mean I really doubt that the major concern of these drug cartels is with weapons with folding stocks...or weapons with bayonets. I am quite sure they are more concerned with weapons that are actually superior at causing devastation and not what they look like.

Can anyone confirm if any of these weapons recovered were actually 'Assault Weapons' as the Ban covers? If none of them were then this is just a Ban against Americans and will have zero impact on the issue in Mexico.

I absolutely agree with you on that point Skwerlrebellion. It is amazing how an act of courageous determination can yield results far beyond and unrelated to the act itself.

To me it seems that if we adopt such a lenient attitude toward our enemies that it will not be long till our policy of politeness actually encourages and makes it advantageous to be an enemy of the United States. I can imagine some peoples in faraway lands likening being captured by the US akin to winning some sort of lottery.