I think this is a political ruse, staged by departing Democrats right before they depart in just a few short days, in an attempt to embarrass the CIA and our covert operations. I also believe that most everything that will be released, we've already heard.
On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 2:54 PM, THE ANNOINTED ONE <[email protected]> wrote: > In the long term of things I believe that this release and many just like > it are necessary. The supposed Intelligence network of the US is riddled > with incompetence and corruption. The only way to end that and get them to > adhere to the ideals that have made and will make the US great once again > is to put them on notice that they are indeed employees of the average US > citizen and not of a corrupt (both sides) political machine that has proven > time and again that the welfare and ideals of the average man are the > driving force and must remain so. > > > On Tuesday, December 9, 2014 1:02:33 PM UTC-6, Travis wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/michael-gerson- >> releasing-the-feinstein-report-in-the-middle-of-a-war- >> would-be-reckless/2014/12/08/e1dd1268-7f15-11e4-8882- >> 03cf08410beb_story.html?wpisrc=nl-headlines&wpmm=1 >> Releasing the Feinstein report is an act of exceptional recklessness >> >> *W*ith the release of the Feinstein report on CIA interrogations >> <http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/feinstein-cia-searched-intelligence-committee-computers/2014/03/11/982cbc2c-a923-11e3-8599-ce7295b6851c_story.html>of >> high-value terrorists a decade ago, let’s consider the situation of >> intelligence personnel who have been involved, not in that program but in >> drone strikes against terrorists, conducted in a variety of countries >> around the world. >> >> They have four sources of direction and protection: Their strikes are >> authorized by the president, briefed to Congress, deemed lawful by the >> attorney general and determined useful by the CIA director. >> >> Michael Gerson is a nationally syndicated columnist who appears twice >> weekly in The Post. *View Archive* >> <http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/michael-gerson> >> >> Yet people in the drone program >> <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/03/08/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-drone-debate-in-one-faq/>know >> that co-workers involved in enhanced interrogation had these assurances as >> well. And the drone program has some distinctive characteristics. Instead >> of employing waterboarding, stress positions and sleep deprivation, the >> targets are killed (sometimes with collateral damage to the innocent). >> President Obama dramatically expanded the use of drones, increasing the >> proportion of attacks that are “signature strikes” — meaning those >> authorizing attacks don’t know the identities of the targets, just their >> likely value. >> >> Some may argue a subtle moral distinction between harshly interrogating a >> terrorist and blowing his limbs apart. But international human rights >> groups and legal authorities generally look down on both. The main >> difference? One is Obama’s favorite program. A few years from now, a new >> president and new congressional leaders may take a different view. >> >> At the CIA, these concerns are not hypothetical. “I know the Predator >> program >> <http://www.washingtonpost.com/sf/investigative/2014/06/20/when-drones-fall-from-the-sky/>intimately,” >> a former senior intelligence officer told me. “There have been hundreds and >> hundreds of Predator shots, the most carefully targeted in the history of >> warfare, but not 100 percent right. What if the next president, [say] Rand >> Paul or Elizabeth Warren, comes after people involved in this program?” >> >> “If you have to worry about a new administration coming along 10 years >> down the road,” the intelligence officer told me, “making villains out of >> agency officials following the exact letter of the law, it is sobering. We >> think about that all the time.” >> >> This is the scrutiny that comes only with success. For many, the 9/11 >> attacks are becoming as historically and emotionally distant as Pearl >> Harbor. But if the United States had the equivalent of a 9/11 attack each >> year, the range of acceptable responses would expand. V-E Day, after all, >> partially resulted from the firebombing of Dresden. V-J Day encompassed >> Hiroshima. Both involved tickertape parades and incinerated children. >> >> >> >> The U.S. response in the war against terrorism has been dramatically more >> selective and focused on combatants. Even so, the CIA is often forced to >> operate at the edge of the United States’ acceptable response — currently >> with drone strikes and a variety of activities to degrade and dismantle >> the Islamic State >> <http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/09/03/us-iraq-crisis-islamicstate-obama-idUSKBN0GY19920140903>. >> The avoidance of “boots on the ground >> <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/06/13/obama-says-he-will-not-send-troops-to-iraq/>” >> in the Middle East has placed an additional burden on intelligence services >> to work with (often flawed) allies, target enemies and strike from afar. >> Political leaders, once again, urge intelligence officials to do what is >> necessary. >> >> >> >> So the Feinstein report comes in the middle of a war, targeting many >> Americans who are still engaged in it. It is an act of exceptional >> congressional recklessness. Democratic senators on the Intelligence >> Committee interviewed none of the key figures in the program, yet fought >> for months to make it easier to identify the targets of their report. >> “Those personnel,” said (soon to be former) Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.), “if >> they have that worry, can be given some legitimate security.” This is >> clearly what some committee members intended: exposure and a bodyguard. >> >> Sen. Dianne Feinstein >> <http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=db84e844-01bb-4eb6-b318-31486374a895> >> (D-Calif.), the outgoing chair of the committee, was thought to be more >> responsible. But her legacy is a massive dump of intelligence details >> useful to the enemy in a time of war. And she knows the likely results. >> Secretary >> of State John Kerry expressed the concerns of allies >> <http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/12/05/kerry-cautions-feinstein-on-timing-cia-report/> >> about increased violence. A National Intelligence Council report >> <http://news.yahoo.com/a-warning-on--torture-report--release-233244652.html> >> warned of threats to embassies, installations and individuals, and explored >> how partners would react to the disclosure. >> >> So why has Feinstein donned her Guy Fawkes >> <http://www.britannia.com/history/g-fawkes.html>mask? Tension with the >> CIA? Simple stubbornness? The main reason, I suspect, is different. >> Democrats who approved of enhanced interrogation at the time (such as >> Feinstein) must now construct an elaborate fantasy world in which they were >> not knowledgeable and supportive. They postulate a new reality in which >> they were innocent and deceived — requiring a conspiracy from three former >> CIA directors, three former deputy directors and hundreds of others. >> >> Occam would indicate a different answer: guilt, hypocrisy and betrayal. >> >> >> >> >> __._,_.___ >> ------------------------------ >> Posted by: "beowulf" <[email protected]> >> ------------------------------ >> >> >> Visit Your Group >> <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/grendelreport/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmdmhxMml0BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzE0MTgxNDkzODY-> >> >> >> [image: Yahoo! Groups] >> <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJlaHRobGwyBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTQxODE0OTM4Ng--> >> • Privacy <https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> >> • Unsubscribe >> <[email protected]?subject=Unsubscribe> • Terms >> of Use <https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/> >> >> __,_._,___ >> >> >> -- > -- > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. > For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum > > * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. > * Read the latest breaking news, and more. > > --- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "PoliticalForum" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
