Citing her reasoning for releasing the report as "Americans have a right to know," and that releasing the report "can and does say to our people that America is big enough to admit when it’s wrong and … learn from its mistakes,” Feinstein also told the world, and the very terrorists we are fighting against, the wrongs that she perceives were done by the CIA.
But there are problems with the report. For one thing, no Republicans on the bipartisan committee participated in producing and publishing this report. In fact, Republicans were against its release.
The committee cites various things that CIA operatives did during enhanced interrogation of prisoners but they interviewed not one person from the CIA - not one person who was actually present during the EIT instances. Nor did they interview anyone from the CIA about the results attained through EIT before saying that no useful information was gained by using these techniques.
The current director of the CIA, John Brennan, as well as at least two former directors and a former head of the agency's Counterterrorism Center, Jose Rodriguez, call the report flawed and said Feinstein's statement that "no useful information was gathered" is absolutely false. At least one person gave up the information that led to Osama bin Laden - information that Feinstein says could have been attained by other means. Dianne Feinstein is an expert on interrogation, I guess.
Many believe Feinstein's release of the report is retaliation for the CIA spying on computers used by her committee. This was her last chance to release the report since she will be replaced as the committee chair when Republicans take control of the Senate in January.
I will leave it to you. Who do you feel knows more about what happened during enhanced interrogations and the aftermath - the CIA or Dianne Feinstein? Personally, every time I hear someone condemn enhanced interrogation techniques I think of the people who made a decision to jump to their deaths from the World Trade Center towers rather than burn to death. Every one of the terrorists that was subjected to EITs was still alive when it was over.
In other news, it seems New York City's crazy liberal mayor may have bit off his own tail. Following his scathing remarks against his city's police department after the Garner case grand jury announced there would be no prosecutions, Mayor Bill De Blasio also stated publicly that he and his wife have taught their biracial son to be very wary and careful around the NYPD. He doubled down recently when two police lieutenants were attacked (on camera) by protesters and De Blasio said the officers were "allegedly" attacked.
Apparently this was too much for the NYPD's Patrolmen's Benevolent Association, who has now put out a form on their website asking officers to sign on against De Blasio and City Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito for their "consistent refusal to show police officers the support and respect they deserve."
The union is asking officers to sign this form and return it to the union to voice their displeasure with his negativity toward the department.
Don’t Insult My Sacrifice
I, _____________________, as a New York City police officer, request that Mayor Bill de Blasio and City Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito refrain from attending my funeral services in the event that I am killed in the line of duty. Due to Mayor de Blasio and Speaker Mark-Viverito's consistent refusal to show police officers the support and respect they deserve, I believe that their attendance at the funeral of a fallen New York City police officer is an insult to that officer's memory and sacrifice.
It's apparent that the mayor has irritated the police and the union with his careless remarks. De Blasio is the Commander-in-Chief, so to speak, of the NYPD and he's out there in public slamming them on a regular basis. Interestingly, the mayor's security detail is made up of NYPD officers. I can't help but wonder how safe he feels these days...?