Tom Cotton Absolutely Destroys 9/11 Mastermind Over Request To Testify At Gina Haspel Hearing

Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the man who planned the tragic September 11, 2001 terror attacks, wants a seat in front of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

He said he wishes to testify against Gina Haspel, who faces a confirmation hearing on Wednesday for the position of Central Intelligence Agency Director.

Republican Senator Tom Cotton, who served five years in the United States Army prior to his service in Congress, had a few things to say to the terrorist.

Cotton tweeted, “Khalid Sheik Mohammed, the 9/11 mastermind, can testify to the Intelligence Committee after every 9/11 widow, widower, & child testifies about what they think of him vs. Gina Haspel & the CIA. Until then, he can rot at Gitmo & then he can rot in hell.”

According to Cotton’s website, the 9/11 attacks occurred during Cotton’s final year of law school and helped motivate him to joining the service.

As the Daily Caller reports, “Mohammed currently resides in the U.S. detention facility in Guantanamo Bay.”


And, “He was brought there in 2006 after being imprisoned in a series of CIA black sites since his March 2003 capture in Pakistan. The use of so-called ‘enhanced interrogation techniques’ on Mohammed and others have drawn scrutiny to the choice of Haspel, who oversaw the program for a time as the CIA’s deputy director for 33 years, as the agency’s new director.”

Haspel, during the confirmation hearing said she would never again revisit the use of these techniques if she is confirmed to be CIA Director.

Cotton has been very supportive of Haspel throughout her confirmation process, saying her “consummate professional whose record of accomplishment, bipartisan support, and clear love of country make her an excellent choice to lead our nation’s top intelligence agency.”

In an op-ed with Fox News, Cotton applauded Haspel’s lengthy service to protecting the country:

President Trump’s nominee for CIA director, Gina Haspel, is set to appear before the Senate Intelligence Committee on Wednesday. As a strong supporter of her nomination, I expect she will do very well.

Despite her opponents’ attempts to paint her as an ideological zealot, Haspel is a consummate professional whose record of accomplishment, bipartisan support, and clear love of country make her an excellent choice to lead our nation’s top intelligence agency.

Unlike many nominees in recent years, Haspel isn’t the representative of a political faction. She’s a career intelligence officer with over 30 years of experience.

Haspel joined the CIA in 1985, working as a case officer for several years in both Africa and Europe. Over time, she rose up the ranks, serving as deputy director of the National Clandestine Service and chief of staff for the director of operations.

In addition, Haspel served as chief of station – that is, the agent responsible for overseeing all of the CIA’s work in a foreign country – four times. If confirmed, she would be the first CIA director in decades who has spent her entire career at the agency – as well as the first woman to lead the agency.

Continued:

Having served under six different presidents from both parties, Haspel is far from an ideologue. She’s an institutionalist who has put in so many years of work that she commands respect throughout the rank and file at the CIA.

Haspel’s opponents have tried to use a small sliver of her career against her by arguing, essentially, that she was just too tough on Al Qaeda for this country to bear. But I’d argue that her willingness to serve in what was a highly stressful post only enhances the case for her confirmation.

In the early 2000s, as the fight against Islamist terrorism heated up, Haspel asked to be reassigned to the CIA’s Counterterrorism Center, where her first day on the job was Sept. 11, 2001.

It’s easy to forget that we lost 3,000 Americans that day in the worst attacks on American soil since Pearl Harbor – and that this was an especially trying time for all those working on national security.

And, again addressing the controversial interrogation techniques:

And yet Haspel volunteered for the mission, later earning the George H.W. Bush Award, granted for excellence in counterterrorism; the Intelligence Medal of Merit; and the Presidential Rank Award, the most prestigious distinction in all of federal civil service.

It’s true, as her critics charge, that Haspel was involved in the use of enhanced interrogation techniques, but once again, their potshots miss the mark. The president approved this program, Congress was fully briefed on it, and it included multiple layers of legal review.

Haspel did draft a cable authorizing the destruction of video recordings of a small number of these interrogations. But it was her direct supervisor who sent the cable – and did so without her knowledge.

In fact, Mike Morell, former acting director of the CIA, later conducted an investigation and cleared Haspel of any wrongdoing, and the special counsel who reviewed the matter closed the case without filing any charges. So instead of demonstrating a troubling tendency to go rogue, Haspel’s tenure shows a fierce dedication to the CIA’s mission and to keeping this country safe.

As Cotton highlights, Haspel has received praise from many of her colleagues:

Haspel’s skill and expertise are widely known and respected on both sides of the aisle. President Obama’s former CIA Director Leon Panetta said he was “glad” the president nominated Haspel because she “knows the CIA inside-out.”

Another former CIA director under President Obama, John Brennan, said Haspel “has the experience – the breadth and depth – on intelligence issues.”

And former CIA Director Michael Hayden, who served under both Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, has called Haspel a “great choice” and “highly regarded.”

These are just three of the over 50 former national security officials who signed a letter to the Senate Intelligence Committee supporting Haspel’s nomination.

Note: The author of this article has included commentary that expresses an opinion and analysis of the facts.

DISCLAIMER: Views expressed in articles do not necessarily reflect the views held by Sarah Palin.


Leave a Reply

Be the First to Comment!

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of