.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

I Hate Linux

Saturday, June 28, 2008

“I’m not at liberty to answer that question”

Like many I wish our politicians could just get along and when they fly off the handle I too often times just shrug and wish I could vote them out... last night though I heard something that got my blood boiling and that couldn't be ignored.

Last night when driving home I heard a clip from C-SPAN from that day when Congressman Bill Delahunt (D-MA) was asking questions of David Addington (chief of staff to the Vice-President) about "enhanced interrogation techniques" and waterboarding, Mr Addington declined to answer some questions in part out of concern that Al-Qaeda may be watching C-SPAN and that his answers could give away too much.

A legitimate concern? Maybe, maybe not. We can at least call it a consistent one from the administration.

The response from Congressman Delahunt however was completely unacceptable when he said in part:

I'm sure they are watching and I'm glad that they finally have the chance to see you Mr. Addington

See the following YouTube video for the longer exchange leading up to this:

At first glance... the Congressman seemed hopeful that Al-Qaeda may just be watching, seeing the face of Mr. Addington and would soon strike against an aid to . Even then… I couldn't quite believe it so I called Congressman Delahunt's Washington office to ask and found the voice mail box was full... so I called back this morning, the conversation went something like this:

Office Congressman Delahunt's office
Me Hello, I was curious if you could tell me what Congressman Delahunt meant yesterday when he said " I’m glad that they finally have a chance to see you Mr Addington" with regards to Al-Quada and the vice-presidents former chief of staff.
Office What state are you calling from?
Me Washington State.
Office I'm sorry but since you aren't…
Me Ma'am I am a US citizen who has serious questions and concerns about the comments of the Congressman who represents far more than the people of Massachusetts 10th district.
Office Do you have a comment you'd like to leave?
Me No… just a question... was the congressman actually calling for the death of a private citizen?
  <5 second pause>
Office I'm not at liberty to answer that question, is there anything else?
Me Thank you, that actually answers my question perfectly.

If there is another reason... I'd love to hear it… unfortunately those other options I can think of are quite laughable.

Have a moment? Feel free to call Congressman Delahunt’s Washington office at 202-225-3111 and ask exactly what he meant.

If you do call… please remember to be respectful.


  • I'm confused as to why you think she answered your question perfectly. Seems likely to me that she's quite simply not allowed to speak for the congressman.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 6:32 AM  

  • I would like to say I am very much for "enhanced interrogation techniques". Most people have no idea what this means let alone know anything about interrogation within the military. I cannot believe how freely people talk about this when they have NO idea what is they are even talking about, like the old saying goes 80% of statistics are made up on the spot.

    We do practice some of these techniques on our own military members when the complete certain schools. What our soldiers endure we sure as hell can have captured detainees do.

    I would have to agree, stating that Al-Qaeda may be watching is a legitimate concern. Its called OPSEC I am glad they used it. And the comment (I'm sure they are watching and I'm glad that they finally have the chance to see you Mr. Addington) to me insinuates that he would like harm to fall onto Mr. Addington.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:43 AM  

  • I'm sure the Congressman got caught up in the moment and said something that he now likely regrets. Happens pretty frequently with these guys.

    I'm also pretty sure that Brendan called this lowly congressional phone-answerer for the sole purpose of getting a quote for his blog. Congratulations, you actually got a congressional administrator who isn't allowed to make any public statements to say "I'm not at liberty to answer that question". What exactly did you expect her to say?

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:47 PM  

  • A truthful answer, or at least a referral to a person or source which could provide such an answer, would have been nice. Dodging the question implies the answer is not one they wish released, as opposed to simply being an answer that individual was not supposed to be providing.

    Try calling to ask the congressman's official position, on, say, off-shore oil drilling. I bet you'll get a different answer: being pointed to a public statement, probably, or referred to someone who can answer.

    By Blogger James, at 11:26 AM  

  • What does this have to do with hating Linux again? I am not interested in your retarded government.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:39 PM  

  • I love your articles. You get these religious folks hooked on the "hating Linux", and they get some down to earth perspective on US politics. Love it! Anyway, leftist politicians will NEVER provide truth - it would destroy them. Their followers, with the usual religious calling to hate America, will always find a way to defend indefensible. And YES, the women did provide the answer to your question, and only a moron could not figure it out.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:50 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home