Pat Dollard

Tweet

By Diane Feinstein

President Barack Obama’s release of memos detailing CIA interrogation policies under the Bush administration has ignited a political firestorm that continues to dominate the nation’s front pages and news programs. The pressure is intense — on Capitol Hill and elsewhere — for Congress to “do something,” and do it fast.

It is intense Diane? Really? Imagine, if you will, Diane, that the pressure is coming from the other 82% of people who want you to do the right thing and NOT dismantle the previous security measures placed to safeguard the country. It is intense, because you know you have to do it fast, or you will get caught.

It’s time to step back, take a breath, and set the record straight.

I’m all for that, yet somehow I feel as though your definition of a straight record and mine are a universe apart

Here are the facts:

Oh joy.

We already are doing something. Last year, the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence began reviewing CIA materials on the first two high-value detainees to be captured, and is finalizing a classified report on their detention and interrogation.

Sure, you’re letting everyone know what capabilities we have, and where they are stationed currently. Including the drones that we may or may not have been flying out of Pakistan. We believe you, you ARE doing something…

Last month, we launched a comprehensive, bipartisan review of CIA interrogation and detention policies. Since then, we have identified and requested from the CIA, among other things, a voluminous amount of materials and records related to conditions of detentions and techniques of interrogations.

THERE IT IS! BIPARTISAN! She actually wants us to believe that this has anything to do with being bipartisan? Probably not, but she HAS to use the word, right? Where are my boots……

The Senate Intelligence Committee is the appropriate body to conduct this review, because it is responsible for the oversight of America’s 16 intelligence agencies — most specifically, the CIA. The committee has access, on a regular basis, to classified materials and is supplementing its existing professional staff to carry out the investigation with bipartisan oversight.

In other words, back off, let US screw this up. Love the use of that “bipartisan oversight” line. As if any opposing opinion from “the other party” would be heard outside those closed chambers.

All of this will be done in a classified environment, and the results will be brought to the full committee for its careful consideration. The committee will make a determination with respect to findings and recommendations.

It’s important to note the fundamental realities underpinning this effort. First, it’s vital that our work be structured in such a way as to avoid a “witch hunt” or a “show trial.” That’s easy. We do the vast bulk of our work behind closed doors — precisely because the subject matter is highly classified. This allows us to examine the entire, unvarnished record in our search for the truth.

Avoiding a “witch hunt” or a “show trial” means that the crafting of a well formed, indisputable (in their eyes) document that does not appear to hang people, just for the sake of hanging them, but to “honestly” make this banana court look as though it has integrity and an actual sense of competence.

Second, for our review to succeed, it simply must be bipartisan, as is our tradition. This committee’s last major investigation, in 2004, into prewar Iraq intelligence, was both bipartisan and critical in providing public understanding of the failed intelligence on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. Democrats and Republicans on the committee came together with shared purpose in this latest endeavor. And we announced the committee’s action, in a joint statement issued March 5.

Wrong again Diane. The “failed intelligence” on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction was simply the failure to use intelligent and logical thought. See, it wasn’t the United States’ responsibility to prove that the martyred Hussein HAD them, it was his duty, by UN mandate that he prove he did not. He could not, and would not, eat the green eggs and ham. Therefore, the UN mandates that hostilities would commence should he not perform his duty were simply ratcheted up by an administration that realized the potential for the harm of innocent people after a direct attack on innocent people otherwise known as September 11, 2001. The “failed intelligence” is nothing more than the left wing extremist shouting down any sensibility in the issue.

Here’s part of what we said: “The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence has agreed on a strong bipartisan basis to begin a review of the CIA’s detention and interrogation program. The purpose is to review the program and to shape detention and interrogation policies in the future.”

Which stops short of stating that the policies in the future disregard the public safety, and intentionally handicap the intelligence gathering capabilities of a nation. OUR nation. A former CIA official has stated as much. Am I missing something?

We went on to explain that the review would specifically examine:

- How the CIA created, operated and maintained conditions of detention and interrogation.

By pursuing those who wished to do this country harm, placing them into custody, and prohibiting their free movement in the world. Shortly thereafter it was question and answer time. Give us the answers and we stop asking questions.

- Whether the CIA accurately described the detention and interrogation program to other parts of the U.S. government, including the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel, and the Senate Intelligence Committee.

It would depend on who is asking. The President? He knew, as does the current President. The AP? They were told what they needed to know. “We captured Baghdad Bob. He can’t deny that.”

- Whether the CIA implemented the program in compliance with official guidance, including covert action findings, Office of Legal Counsel opinions and CIA policy.

Certainly they did, and then the took effective actions that amateurs like you, Diane, wouldn’t know to take, or might object to.

- The intelligence gained through the use of enhanced and standard interrogation techniques.

All of which led to the ineffectiveness of our enemies.

Our objective is clear: to achieve a full understanding of this program as it evolved in the wake of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

Be careful what you wish for. Be even more careful what you divulge. Otherwise, Diane, it may be your door one day that get’s visited by an inbound 747.

So amid all the quarreling and confusion, I say this: Let’s not prejudge or jump to conclusions. And let’s resist the temptation to stage a Washington spectacle, high in entertainment value, but low in fact-finding potential.

Well, now, there’s a change. I thought it was an unwritten rule in the leftwing extremism manifesto that all things be high in entertainment value. “Oooo shiny….”

Let the Senate Intelligence Committee do its job.

If it would, we would. Surprise me.

Mrs. Feinstein is chairman of the U.S. Senate Select Committee on Intelligence. (Now isn’t that an oxymoron?)