|
Afterword
As this volume goes to press, additional
materials on Abu Ghraib and new materials on Guantanamo are daily
finding their way into the public arena via the media, human rights
groups and indefatigable researchers. Included are a select few of those
documents, brought to light by the American Civil Liberties Union. They
include reports on detainee mistreatment and abuse and discussions among
the FBI, the Department of Defense, and the White House.
Following the newly released ACLU
documents is a statement from David Hicks, a detainee at Guantanamo.
Hicks is an Australian citizen.
SECRET//NOFORN//20290625
INFO MEMO
S 0517/DR
June 25, 2004
FOR: UNDER SECRETARY OF DEFENSE FOR
INTELLIGENCE
FROM: L. E. Jacoby, Vice Admiral, USN,
Director, Defense Intelligence Agency
Subject: (S//NF) Alleged
Detainee Abuse by TF 62-6 Personnel
(S//NF) During the
afternoon of 24 June 2004, we were notified that DIA personnel serving
with TF 6-26 in Baghdad had informed their ISG seniors of the following:
-
(S//NF) Two DIA,
Directorate for Human Intelligence (DIA/DH) interrogators/debriefers
assigned to support TF 6- 26 (SOF) have observed:
-
Prisoners arriving at the
Temporary Detention Facility in Baghdad with burn marks on their
backs. Some have bruises, and some have complained of kidney
pain.
-
One of the two DIA/DH
interrogators/debriefers witnessed TF 6-26 officers punch a
prisoner in the face to the point the individual needed medical
attention. This record of treatment was not recorded by TF 6-26
personnel. In this instance, the debriefer was ordered to leave
the room.
-
One DIA/DH interrogator/debriefer
took pictures of the injuries and showed them to his TF 62-6
supervisor, who immediately confiscated them.
-
(S//NF) TF 6-26
personnel have taken the following actions with regards to DIA/DH
interrogators/debriefers:
-
Confiscated vehicle keys
-
Instructed them not to leave
the compound without specific permission, even to get a haircut
at the PX
-
Threatened them
-
Informed them that their
e-mails were being screened
-
Ordered them not to talk to
anyone in the US
-
(S//NF) The two DH
strategic debriefers assigned to TF 62-6 reported the above
information to the Operations Officer. He immediately
contacted DIA IG Forward and asked that both individuals be
interviewed. The IG representative made the recommendation
that VADM Church's group be immediately apprised in order to get
this into official IG channels as the issue fell directly under its
charter. The Church IG Team senior investigating officer is
conducting interviews of the interrogators/debriefers today.
The DIA IG was informed and concurred with this course of action.
-
(S//NF) The ISG
Operations Officer contacted and briefed the Director of the ISG,
who was in Qatar attending a Commander's Conference. The ISG
Director informed the Deputy Commander for Detainee Affairs, MNF-1.
He subsequently contacted the Commander of TF 6-26 and directed him
to investigate this situation. In turn the TF 6-26 Commander
informed his superior, the Commander ISOC. The Commander,
CENTCOM has also been informed of this situation.
-
(S//NF) The two
interrogators/debriefers were directed to return to the ISG compound
at Camp Slayer due to these events.
SECRET//NOFORN/X1
UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT
memorandum
DATE: 10 June, 2004
REPLY TO ATTN OF: [delete]
SUBJECT: Memorandum for Record
-- Report of Violations of The Geneva Conventions and the International
Laws of Land Warfare (U)
1. (S) From
[delete] I was employed by the Defense Intelligence Agency as an
Intelligence Officer assigned and under the operational control to
[delete]. I have been in the civilian employment of the Department
of Defense in the capacity of intelligence officer for approximately 14
years. I have received specialized on-the-job-training in HUMINT
operations, to include interrogation. I spoke about the incidents
reported in the document during a meeting with [delete] at approximately
12:15 pm. Present at the meeting were [delete].
(U) This statement is in support of the
following:
a. (U) Two counts of violations of
The Geneva Convention as it pertains to detainee abuse.
b. (U) One count of violations of
The Geneva Convention as it pertains to the illegal detainment of
non-combatants.
3. (U) Details:
a. (S//NF) (1st
count, ref para 2.a.) On or about 11 May 2004, in Baghdad, Iraq, I
witnessed the mistreatment of a TF 6-26 detainee during the initial
interrogation after his capture. During the interrogation, conducted by
a US Army interrogator, four or five non-interrogator personnel from the
Task Force entered the room and began slapping the detainee white he was
attempting to respond to the questioning. After approximately 15
minutes, a senior NCO, going by call sign "X03" entered the room and
asked most of the personnel to leave, to include ALL of the
interrogators. I am not aware of what specifically occurred during my
absence. [Delete] officer assigned to the Task Force, was present
as well and witness the incident. [Delete] was observing the
interrogation and I was assisting the lead interrogator, A 1st SF Group
interrogator also augmenting the unit. I am not aware if this matter has
been previously reported.
b. (S//NF) (2nd
count, ref para 2.a.) During another TF 6-26 operation in Baghdad,
a [delete] of the Coalition Provisional Authority's Counterintelligence
office PA-C1) was arrested during a raid targeting an al-Qaida
facilitator. [Delete] and two male family members were detained
and moved to the TF 6-26 screening facility. [Delete] and his
family members were released and during the initial debriefing of
[delete] he reported to TF 6-26 and CPA-CI handlers that he had been
"slapped around" during initial interrogation at the place of his
capture. The matter was reported in an internal TF contract report
to the B Squadron commander by the DIA handling officer. [Delete]
c. (S//NF) (Ref
para 2.b.) On 9 May 2004, TF 6-26 personnel detained the wife of a
suspected Iraqi terrorist, in Tarmiya, Iraq. The 28-year-old
woman had three young children at the house, one being as young as six
months and still nursing. Her husband was the primary target of
the raid, with other suspect personnel subject to detainment as well.
The house belonged to the primary target's in-laws, and it was believed
his wife and children would be there as well. During the
pre-operation brief it was recommended by TF personnel that if the wife
were present, she be detained and held in order to leverage the primary
target's surrender. I objected to the detainment of the young
mother to the raid team leader, "X03." I believed it was a dead
issue, since I would be on-target and responsible for screening the
occupants of the house for suspects to detain. During my initial
screening of the occupants at the target house, I determined that the
wife could provide no actionable intelligence leading to the arrest her
husband. Despite my protest, the raid team leader detained her
anyway. I concurred with the arrest of one of her brothers,
who had been identified as likely having knowledge of the primary
target's location. I reported the incident to the HUMINT support
element operations officer. [Delete] as I understand it, the matter was
in turn reported to the Task Force HQ. Approximately two day
later, the wife and her brother were released into the custody of their
tribal sheikh.
4. (U) Concluding statement:
The tactical interrogation report is a record of the interrogation and
is more often then not the only written record forwarded with the
detainees as they are moved through the detention system from screening
facilities to final detention centers. Since those interrogation
reports, as a matter of record, contain the names of the interrogators,
any mistreatment of detainees, whether in the presence of the
interrogator or not, reflects adversely and directly on the interrogator
named in the report. This is a liability to the DHS collector and
the DIA. It is my recommendation that any direct interrogation
support to a DoD element by DHS be supported with an MOU clearly
defining DoD interrogation and detainee treatment policies.
FROM: DH HUMINT SCG, SEP 03
DECL ON: X1
UNCLASSIFIED
Thu Jan 17 01:55:06 2002 (Islamabad 295)
TFI COPY 14 OF 14 Page 1 OF 3
PTP0943
SECRET
RELEASED IN PART B1, 1.4(D)
PAGE 01 ISLAMA 00295 01 OF 02 170633Z
INFO: CIAE(01) D(01) DODE(01) INR
(01) NSCE(01) P(01) S(01) SA(01) SPX(01) SS(01) SSO(01) SSOX(01) T(01)
TF1(01)
170155L JAN 02 DJB (TOTAL COPIES: 014)
COMMENT: TOPAR 147; NSC/DOD FOR
ADDRESSES AS LISTED
INFO: SWO(00)
170629Z JAN 02 STePS (TOTAL COPIES:000)
ACTION NODS-00
INFO LOG-00 CCOE-00 SAS-00 /000W
58FB9C 170633Z / 38
0 170619Z JAN 02
FM AMEMBASSY ISLAMABAD
TO SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 275B
NSC WASHDC IMMEDIATE
SECDEF WASHINGTON DC IMMEDIATE
INFO USCINCCENT MACDILL AFB FL IMMEDIATE
SECRET SECTION 01 OF 02 ISLAMABAD 000295
NODIS
FROM USLO KABUL #0050
FROM SPECIAL PRESIDENTIAL ENVOY ZAL
KHALILZAD
SECSTATE FOR SECRETARY POWELL AND A/S
ROCCA
NSC FOR NSA RICE AND HADLEY
SECDEF FOR RUMSFELD AND WOLFOWITZ
E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/16/22
TAGS: PREL, PGOV, PROP, PTER, PINS, AF
SUBJECT: VISIT TO QANDAHAR: FOCUS ON DETAINEES
SECTION 01 OF 02 Islamabad 295
SUBJECT: USLO-KABUL #0050 QANDAHAR
DETAINEES
Classified by Special Presidential Envoy
Zal Khalilzad.
Reason 1.5 (b) and (d).
SUMMARY:
1. (S) Accompanied by my delegation
members, I called on [Delete] with a report on detainees as well as an
assessment of the ground situation. As a part of the briefing, I
visited the airport holding facility for the Cuba-bound al Qaida and
Taliban detainees. End Summary.
OBJECTIVES
2. (s) [Delete] has three principal
objectives -- to process and transport the detainees, to clean up
weapons and munitions caches and to support Special Forces operations --
tasks made all the more difficult because of the estimated 19,000
Taliban and al Qaida soldiers in the hills surrounding Qandahar as well
as in the city itself. While the Taliban Pose a concern to the base -
both because of the possibility of an attack on the U.S. military camp,
either with a terrorist motive or in an attempt to free the captives -
General Mattis told me that his primary concern relates to landmines and
unexploded ordinance. He explained that the Taliban have re-mined areas
that were marked as mine free. The General told me that several Marines
and a number of local fighters had been seriously injured in land-mine
incidents.
3. (C) [Delete] regard to access to
detainees for interrogation purposes, cooperation is also
excellent between USG and foreign agencies seeking information.
DETAINEES
[Delete]
5. (S) There are currently 380 prisoners
from a number of countries, [delete]. Some European detainees have
told their interrogators that they joined the Taliban/al Qaida for the
adventure. Others say hate for the U.S. led them to the Taliban. Most of
the prisoners are between 20- 30 years of age, but several appear to be
in their sixties. The detainees are held in groups of twenty in razor
wired pens. There is no privacy and even calls of nature are performed
in public a practice aimed at preventing suicide or escapes during the
unsupervised periods. The only prisoners not held in open pens are
those who are located in a small hangar, either for interrogation or
because they are high-ranking and need to be separated from others for
interrogation purposes. [Delete]
6. (S) Walking through the detention
center, I observed the detainees, uniformly attired in blue coveralls,
seated in pens and sleeping or reading the Koran, the only book they are
allowed. Several detainees ware carrying the honey buckets for
disposal across the compound. Each prisoner had two blankets (purchased
locally to boost the economy the General said).
7. (S) We also visited the field hospital
where detainees are treated by the same military doctors who treat the
American soldiers. The doctors explained that the detainees generally
arrive with severe gastroenteritis complicated by malnutrition. A few
have serious battle injuries, including some which require below the
knee amputations. Respecting a policy of informed consent, the doctors
said that no detainee has agreed to an amputation, preferring to
rely on various temporary measures that will not save the limb but will
prolong the situation. The doctors told me these detainees believe that
their limbs will be repaired once they reach their next destination,
perhaps the U.S. As a part of a delousing program, the military has had
to shave off the beards of some of the Cuba-bound detainees, a practice
the Red Cross has approved.
8. (S) Detainees eat MREs (Meals Ready to
Eat) just like their captors although all pork products have been
removed. The plastic spoons also are removed from the packets since the
detainees might sharpen them and use the implements as weapons or a tool
for suicide.
9. (S) Detainees are allowed to talk to
residents in their own pen, but large groups are not allowed. They are
not allowed to talk to prisoners in other pens. The General's assessment
of the detainees is based on interaction with them over an extended
period. He considers them hostile and dangerous. They shout epithets at
their captors, including threats against the female relatives of the
soldiers guarding them, knee Marines in the groin, and say that they
will escape and kill "more Americans and Jews." The General is all
business. There is a risk that the detainees may try to throw their
blankets over the razor wire and make a run for it. [Delete]
10. (S) The General does not consider
the Taliban and al Qaida to be particularly devout and cites as an
example the defiled mosque at the airport. Littered with garbage and
piles of human excrement, the General said people who would desecrate
their own religious sites in this way were hardly religious. [Delete]
11. (C) Another part of the General's
job is to clean up weapons and ammunition caches. The triage process
involves sorting by category, removing those items which are of interest
to the USG and shipping them back to the U.S., and destroying the rest.
When I asked if we had considered turning these over to the Interim
Authority, the General said that the items thus far were degraded to a
point where they were no longer useful.
12. (C) Due to scheduling problems, I was
unable to meet local officials but hope to return on January 18.
CHAMBERLIN
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE
REVIEW AUTHORITY: WILLIAM E LANDFAIR
DATE/CASE ID: 19 OCT 2004 200303827
NODIS UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
200201625
United States Department of State
Washington, D.C. 20520
Jan 24 2002
Dep Sec Has Seen
RELEASED IN PART B6
INFORMATION MEMORANDUM
S/ES
SECRET/NOFORN
DECL: 1/24/12
TO: The Deputy Secretary
FROM: PM - Gregory M. Suchan,
Acting
SUBJECT: Nationalities at Bagram
You asked for information regarding the
nationalities of the prisoners held at the Bagram facility. The CWG has
collected the following information:
Bagram is a temporary "collection center"
where some detainees stop over enroute to their permanent location. The
conditions at Bagram are stable. Plans are to construct accommodations
for 75 detainees. Currently there are 27 detainees at this location.
|
Detainees at the Bagram
Facility |
| Country |
No. of Detainees |
| Yemeni |
10 |
| Afghani |
4 |
| Pakistani |
1 |
| Kuwaiti |
2 |
| Saudi |
5 |
| Tunisian |
2 |
| Egyptian |
1 |
| Palestinian |
1 |
| Morrocan |
2 |
Attachment:
Tab 1- List of Detainees (in detail)
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE
REVIEW AUTHORITY: WILLIAM E LANDFAIR
DATE/CASE ID: 04 OCT 1004 200303827
Classified by PM A/S Gregory M. Suchan,
Acting
Reasons: E.O. 12958, 1.5 (b) and (d)
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
NotesTele. TXT
UNCLASSIFIED
TELEGRAM
March 24, 2004
RELEASED IN PART
B6
To: SECSTATE WASH DC - PRIORITY
Action: IO
From: USMISSION GENEVA (GENEVA 824
- PRIORITY)
TAGS: PHUM
Captions: None
Subject: LETTER FROM SPECIAL RAPPORTEUR
ON TORTURE TO AMBASSADOR BREMMER REGARDING FOUR MEN BEING HELD IN BASRA,
IRAQ
Ref: None
1. Mission has received a letter dated
March 12, 2004 from Theo van Boven, Special Rapporteur on Torture
regarding the detention of four individuals in Basra, Iraq.
2. Begin text of letter:
Excellency,
I have the honour to address you in my
capacity as Special Rapporteur on torture pursuant to Commission on
Human Rights resolution 2001/62.
In this connection, I would like to draw
the attention of your Excellency's Government to information I have
received regarding [Delete]
[Delete] The four men are reportedly held
incommunicado detention at the "Intelligence Directorate" in Basra;
Basra being currently under control of the United Kingdom military.
The "Intelligence Directorate" was
reportedly formed a few months ago by the Badr organization, the alleged
armed wing of the political group, the Supreme Council for the Islamic
Revolution in Iraq. Several people are said to have been held
incommunicado and tortured at the directorate's headquarters in Basra.
The methods of torture reportedly include lashing on various parts of
the body, specifically on the back with an iron stick inserted inside a
plastic pipe.
In view of their alleged incommunicado
detention, it is feared that they may be at risk of torture or
ill-treatment.
Without in any way implying any
determination of the facts of the case, I should like to appeal to your
Excellency to seek clarification of the circumstances with a view to
ensuring that the right to physical and mental integrity of the
above-named persons is protected. Under Articles 3 and 4 of the 1949
Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time
of War, the Coalition Provisional Authority, as the occupying power is
obliged to respect the rights of civilians in occupied territories,
including the prohibition of cruel treatment, torture, and humiliating
and degrading treatment. Moreover, this is set forth, inter alia, in the
Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights and the Declaration on the Protection of All
Persons from being subjected to Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment or Punishment. I would also like to draw your
Excellency's attention to Commission on Human Rights resolution 2001/62
and 2003/32 which remind all States that "prolonged incommunicado
detention may facilitate the perpetration of torture and can in itself
constitute a form of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, and
urges all States to respect the safeguards concerning the liberty,
security and dignity of the person." (paras 10 and 14 respectively).
I would greatly appreciate receiving
information from your Excellency's Government concerning the steps taken
by the competent authorities in compliance with the provisions contained
in the international legal instruments referred to above, as they apply
to the aforementioned persons.
Accept, Excellency, the assurances of my
highest consideration.
Theo van Boven
UNCLASSIFIED
RELEASED IN PART B1, 1.4(D), B6
CONFIDENTIAL
Page 01 KABUL 01012 00 OF 02 181302Z
INFO: G(00) SP(00) SS (00) WO(00) P(00)
SRPP(00) SWCI(00) PRS (00) SSO (00) USNW (00) R(00) SS0(00) USNW(00) SCT
(00)
181319Z APR 03 STePS (TOTAL COPIES: 000)
ACTION SWCI-00
INFO LOG-00 AID-00 SRPP-00 EB-00 EUR-00
TEDE-00 INR-00
10-00 L-00 NEA-00 NSAE-00 OIC-02 PM-00 PRS-00
P-00 SCT-00 SP-00 SSO-00 SS-00 STR-00 TRSE-00
USIE-00 SA-00 PMB-00 PRM-00 DRL-01 G-00 SAS-00
/003W
57EC4F 181318Z / 45
0 180811Z APR 03
FM AMEMBASSY KABUL
TO SECSTATE WASHDC IMMEDIATE 7196
INFO FBI WASHDC PRIORITY
GENEVA USMISSION PRIORITY
AMEMBASSY ASHGABAT
AMEMBASSY DUSHANBE
AMEMBASSY ISLAMABAD
AMEMBASSY TASHKENT
AMCONSUL KARACHI
AMCONSUL PESHAWAR
NSC WASHDC
DIA WASHDC
CIA WASHDC
JOINT STAFF WASHDC//J5/UNMAI//
JOINT STAFF WASHINGTON DC//J-3//
CJCS WASHINGTON DC
USMISSION USUN NEW YORK
COMCJTF 180 BAGRAM AFG//CG/C3/C9/POLAD//
SECDEF WASHDC//USDP/J3//
USCINCCENT MACDILL AFB FL//CCJ3/CCJ4/CCJ5/POLAD//
USCINCSOC MACDILL AFB FL
CONFIDENTIAL KABUL 001012
NSC FOR. ZKHALILZAD, JDWORKEN, HMANN,
RHANSON, DSEDNEY
PACOM FOR POLAD
CENTCOM FOR POLAD
E.O. 12958: DECL: 04/17/2013
TAGS: PREL. PHUM, PTER, KAWC, AF, PK
SUBJECT: IMPROVED CONDITIONS AT
SHIBERGHAN PRISON
REF: STATE 95030 (NOTAL)
Classified By: AMBASSADOR ROBERT P. FINN
FOR REASONS 1.5
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE
REVIEW AUTHORITY: FRANK E SCHMELZER
DATE/CASE ID: 30 SEP 2004 200303827
UNCLASSIFIED
(B) AND (D)
1. (C) Summary. The prison in the
provincial (Jowzjan) capital of Shiberghan has the largest population of
Taliban prisoners in Afghanistan. Shortly after the fall of the
Taliban the prison suffered from over-crowding as well as shortages of
food and medicine. A site visit on April 17 revealed a significantly
better life for the prisoners with one-third the population of a year
ago and sufficient nutrition and medical care. End summary.
2. (C) Mazar-e Sharif-based Poloff
conducted a site visit accompanied by a military civil affairs team with
expertise in preventative medicine and prison assessment. A citizen
soldier provided prison assessment expertise from the U.S. Army civil
Affairs Unit. Prior to being called to active duty in Afghanistan,
[delete]
3. (C) The delegation interviewed the
prison warden, Akhtar Khan and [delete] prior to inspecting the
grounds, medical facility, and interviewing 13 prisoners.
4. (C) The warden reported this is a 43
year-old prison built to support 1000 inmates. In January 2002, the
population swelled to 3478 as Taliban forces surrendered or were
captured. Local forces were taxed to their capacity to care for the
prisoners and requested assistance from the International Committee of
the Red Cross (ICRC) for supplemental feeding assistance, prisoner
registration, as well as, humanitarian medical and sanitation
assistance.
5. (C) The picture is now better in April
2003 with a prison population of 1088, comprised of 564 Pakistani and
524 Afghan prisoners. Most of the prisoners have been in confinement
for one and a half years. [Delete] there are 75 known Taliban
commanders and 35 inmates convicted of civil crimes such as
murder, robbery, gambling, and sexual abuse. The population was reduced
by over 1000 through a series of amnesty decrees from President Karzai
during Eid celebrations; others were released after investigation by the
intelligence agencies. A small number of prisoners were transferred
to U.S. control for detention elsewhere.
6. (C) The health of the prisoners has
improved dramatically in the past year. There were three patients in the
14-bed sick ward with mild respiratory difficulties compared to an
overflowing combat casualty ward in 2002. The humanitarian NGO
Emergencies provides all the medicine and a medical staff of three. The
physicians interviewed confirmed additional assistance is provided by
the Shiberghan city public health hospital primarily to treat the 108
cases of tuberculosis (TB). There are 25 contagious TB patients housed
in a stark but uncrowded TB isolation cellblock close to the infirmary
and away from the prison population. The balance of the TB patients have
been treated, do not have active TB and have been returned to the prison
population. The medical facility is clean and provides a higher standard
of care than the Balkh and Mazar regional clinics for Afghan citizens.
The warden and medical staff reported one death in 2003 compared to 36
in 2002. There no longer is concern with dysentery or jaundice in the
prison population. The ICRC has assisted in upgrading the sanitation
system of the prison and the medical staff provides health education.
Periodic outbreaks of lice and scabies are treated with appropriate
medication and are not prevalent. The prisoner's clothes and bodies
appeared as clean as the Afghan population we observe daily in Mazar and
the Afghan countryside.
7. (C) The diet of the prisoners has
steadily improved as the population decreased to a more manageable
level. The ICRC provided a supplemental feeding program during the
winter of 2002-2003 to ensure adequate nutrition. This was discontinued
as the three meals currently provide sufficient calories. The diet
includes bread and sugar for breakfast, rice for lunch and beans for
dinner. Drinking water is from a tap in the cellblock.
8. (C) Poloff did not observe outward
signs of physical mistreatment of the prisoners. Except for a walk
through of the central courtyard where prisoners could be seen from
behind locked gates and 13 randomly selected interiews with inmates, the
delegation members did not go into the cellblocks for their own
protection. Prison officials wanted to offer access but were
correctly concerned about a spontaneous uprising of passionate Taliban
and suspected al-Qaida prisoners against an American official. The
ICRC [delete] conduct bi-weekly visits to this prison with unfettered
access to all prisoners. All the prisoners interviewed by the
delegation said they had spoken with an ICRC representative and some
have received and sent letters and had visits from relatives as a result
of registration.
9. (C) The prisoners rotate
for exercise by cellblock. The cells are emptied, scrubbed down, and
bedding is aired out during their exercise rotation. Prisoners may flow
between the interior and exterior courtyards during this time.
Non-compliant prisoners are isolated or have their movement restricted.
Prisoners may have visitors for five minutes on Mondays and Thursdays
and may receive packages from family and friends.
10. (C) Comment: Following a January
2002 visit by Physicians for Human Rights (PHR) to Shiberghan prison.
PHR released a report documenting the poor conditions there. Shiberghan
became a synonym for misery. Human rights and press reporting since then
have continued to feed off the PHR report that is now over a year old
and out of date. Lodging and food at Shiberghan are on par with
those of most Afghans who are not in prison. The medical facility and
treatment is superior to what is available to citizens in the region. We
saw no overt signs of animosity directed by the prison staff toward the
prisoners, and the prisoners did not appear to be afraid of the guard
staff. While conditions at Shiberghan are not ideal, prison officials
working with IOs and NGOs have clearly improved prison standards and
reduced the misery that was so evident in January 2002. End comment.
FINN
UNCLASSIFIED
200330899
United States Department of State
Ambassador-at-Large for
War Crimes Issues
Washington, D.C. 20520
December 12, 2003
RELEASED IN PART B6
Yvan Peeters
Dear Ms. Peeters:
Thank you for your letter of October 12
to Secretary Powell expressing concern related to juveniles detainees
held under U.S. control at a U.S. Naval Base located in Guantanamo Bay,
Cuba. Secretary Powell has asked me to respond to your letter on
his behalf.
The detention of juveniles in accordance
with the laws and customs of war is consistent with U.S. obligations
under the Convention on the Rights of the Child. As with all
detainees, these individuals are being held because they are enemy
combatants who pose a threat to United States forces. The United
States recognizes the special needs of younger detainees and the
difficult circumstances surrounding their situation, and is treating
young enemy combatants in a manner appropriate to their status and age.
Sincerely,
Pierre Prosper
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE
REVIEW AUTHORITY: FRANK E SCHMELZER
DATE/CASE ID: 24 SEP 2004 200303827
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
S/S 200332515
S35
United States Department of State
Ambassador-at-Large for
War Crimes Issues
Washington, D.C. 20520
RELEASED IN PART B6
ORIG LTR TO ADDRESSEE BY BUREAU
COPY TO:
IPS
(HEW)
February 23, 2004
Tausif Paracha
Dear Mr. Paracha:
Thank you for your letter to Secretary
Powell expressing concern related to a detainee held under U.S. control
at an airbase in Afghanistan.
The United States and its Coalition
partners are at war with the al Qaida network and remnants of the
Taliban who continue to support them. The al Qaida network today is a
multinational enterprise with operations in more than 60 countries.
Active hostilities are ongoing daily in Afghanistan and around the
world. We continue to fight against enemy combatants who are planning
and conducting attacks against the international community. In this
context, operational and security concerns compel me to refrain from
confirming or commenting on the circumstances of capture, transfer or
detention of specific individuals believed to be held as enemy
combatants in the course of that conflict.
Let me assure you, however, that
President Bush has affirmed on any number of occasions that at Qaida
and Taliban detainees are treated humanely, and, to the extent
consistent with military necessity, in a manner consistent with the
principles of the Third Geneva Convention of 1949. As a result.
representatives of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC)
routinely visit detainees individually and privately. United States
Government personnel are not permitted to torture detainees or
participate in torture by others. Torture is a violation of the laws of
the United States. Allegations of torture will be thoroughly
investigated. In cases where the United States Government transfers
detainees to other countries for detention or questioning on our behalf,
we seek and receive assurances that the detainees will not be tortured
and will be treated humanely.
The authority to detain enemy
combatants for the duration of hostilities exists in law independent of
the civil or criminal justice system. In this war, as in every war,
enemy combatants are not provided counsel or access to courts for the
purpose of challenging their detention while hostilities are ongoing.
While some enemy combatants may face criminal prosecution before the end
of hostilities, nations at war traditionally have waited until
hostilities cease to bring such charges. If and when an enemy is charged
with a crime, he would then be entitled to access to counsel and be
afforded other privileges necessary to receive a fair trial.
Sincerely,
Pierre-Richard Prosper
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE
REVIEW AUTHORITY: FRANK E SCHMELZER
DATE/CASE ID: 24 SEP 2004 200303827
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
Tausif Paracha
RELEASED IN PART B6
November 3, 2003
RE: Illegal Detainment of Saifullah
Paracha
Dear Mr. Powell
I hope you recover well from your surgery
and wish you a Merry Christmas. This letter is in regards to my uncle.
Kidnapping, torture, use of chemicals,
would you ever think the United States of America would be involved in
this. My uncle is living proof of this. The US government on July
5th kidnapped him. My family was literally begging the US government to
let us know if he was just alive, and they refused to comment. We found
out about two months after he was kidnapped. We received a letter from
the International Red Cross that he is in US custody in Afghanistan.
As newspapers and well-known magazines
like Time, Guardian, Newsweek state, torture and use of chemicals takes
place at the US base on detainees in Afghanistan. How can the US be
involved in such atrocious behavior. Nothing justifies kidnapping and
torturing people. How can a country such as the US who has always
supported Human Rights be involved in such uncivilized actions.
I myself am a 9/11 survivor, I was in
front of the WTC on Sept 11th. I am pleading for you to help us in
our cause. We just want the US government to act civilized. If the US
government has proof of my uncle being involved in something unjust,
bring him into the legal process. Bring him to a court and provide him
an attorney as amendment VI of the Bill of Rights state.
Everything the government is doing to my
uncle is against the US constitution, International law, and Universal
Declaration of Human Rights. There is a legal system the US follows; all
we want is to have America follow that.
Amendment VI
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused
shall enjoy the right to a speedy, and public trial, by an impartial
jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been
committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law,
and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be
confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process
for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of
counsel for his defense.
Amendment VIII
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor
excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS
Article 5.
No one shall be subjected to torture or
to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment
Article 6.
Everyone has the right to recognition
everywhere as a person before the law.
Article 7.
All are equal before the law and are
entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All
are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation
of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.
Article 8.
Everyone has the right to an effective
remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the
fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.
Article 9.
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary
arrest, detention or exile.
Article 10.
Everyone is entitled in full equality to
a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in
the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal
charge against him.
Article 11.
(I) Everyone charged with a penal offence
has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to
law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary
for his defense.
(2) No one shall be held guilty of any
penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute
a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when
it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one
that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.
Everyone of these laws are being
violated, on a national and international level.
I am a US citizen and have lived in New
York my entire life. [Delete] I am again pleading for your
assistance, if you can help in anyway it will be greatly appreciated.
Respectfully yours,
Tausif Paracha
President
Verticity
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE
REVIEW AUTHORITY: FRANK E SCHMELZER
DATE/CASE ID: 24 SEP 2004 200303827
UNCLASSIFIED
H009 06/02/2004 14:07.
UNCLASSIFIED
RELEASED IN FULL
United States Department of State
Washington, D.C. 20520
Jun 1, 2004
Dear Mr. Skelton:
In your letter to Dr. Rice dated May 20,
you asked ''when was Secretary Powell or his staff at the State
Department given a copy of the ICRC report?" Similar questions were
asked about when the President, the Secretary of Defense, and others
were given the report. Dr. Rice has replied on behalf of the President.
As she noted in her May 20 response to you, the U.S. Mission in Geneva
obtained a copy, and transmitted it to the Department on March 5. The
NSC was provided a copy of the ICRC report the same day. The Secretary
of State received an internal memorandum describing the allegations of
the report on March 11.
We hope this information is helpful to
you. If we can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to
contact us again.
Sincerely,
Paul V. Kelly
Assistant Secretary
Legislative Affairs
The Honorable
Ike Skelton,
House of Representatives.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE
REVIEW AUTHORITY: WILLIAM E LANDFAIR
DATE/CASE ID: 26 OCT 2004 200303827
UNCLASSIFIED
H2004 0525-009
UNCLASSIFIED
RELEASED IN FULL
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
May 20, 2004
MEMORANDUM FOR THE SECRETARY OF STATE
THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE
SUBJECT: Letter from Representative
Skelton regarding February 2004 Report of the International Committee of
the Red Cross
Representative Skelton wrote the
president on May 10, 2004, to ask, among other things, when the
Departments of State and Defense became aware of the February 2004
Report of the International Committee of the Red Cross (Tab B). I have
provided a response to Representative Skelton on behalf of the President
(Tab A). I request that each of you provide a response to Representative
Skelton on behalf of your departments.
Condoleezza Rice
Assistant to the President
for National Security Affairs
Attachments
Tab A: Copy of Rice Letter to Representative Skelton
Tab B: Copy of Incoming Correspondence from Representative Skelton
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE
REVIEW AUTHORITY: WILLIAM E LANDFAIR
DATE/CASE ID: 26 OCT 2004 200303827
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
RELEASED IN FULL
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
May 20, 2004
Dear Representative Skelton:
I am responding to your letter to the
President dated May 10, 2004.
Before the date of your letter, neither
the President nor I were given a copy of the International Committee of
the Red Cross (ICRC) February 2004 report on Iraq. The ICRC did not
provide a copy of the report to the White House. When ICRC President
Kellenberger met with me on January 15, he did not raise the issue of
mistreatment of detainees in Iraq nor did he mention that ICRC was
preparing a report.
National security Council staff learned
in mid-February that ICRC officials had provided a report about
ill-treatment of Iraqi detainees to CPA officials in Baghdad. Our staff
inquired with DOD officials in Washington about the ICRC report and were
told that DOD officials were generally aware of the allegations, were
seeking more information about them, and that military authorities
were investigating them. The Secretary of Defense had already informed
the President that the Department of Defense was investigating
allegations of mistreatment of detainees in Iraq.
National Security Council staff sought
and eventually received a copy of the ICRC report from the State
Department in early March. Our staff was told that the State
Department's Mission in Geneva had obtained a copy of the report from
ICRC officials in Geneva. Our staff was also told by State Department
officials that the ICRC was reluctant to share the report with
Washington because the issues were being handled between local ICRC
officials and United States Government authorities in Baghdad with whom
the ICRC had a positive working relationship that the ICRC did not wish
to jeopardize. Finally, NSC staff were told that the ICRC had told
the State Department that ICRC officials in Baghdad were pleased with
the initial response by United States Government officials in Baghdad
and with steps already taken by United States Government authorities to
respond positively to the report. National Security council staff were
informed that the ICRC had told the State Department that ICRC planned
to conduct another round of inspections soon and expected to be able to
report substantial improvements. Upon receiving the report, NSC staff
asked appropriate DOD officials to review the issues raised in the
report.
You also asked when Secretaries Powell,
and Rumsfeld or their staffs were given copies of the ICRC report. In
order to provide a rapid response to your letter, I have provided you
information about when the NSC was informed about the ICRC report.
Secretaries Powell and Rumsfeld have asked their departments to collect
information'about the handling of the ICRC report in their departments,
and I have asked them to reply to you directly as soon as that
information is available.
Finally, you have asked why the ICRC
report was not shared with the Congress. ICRC reports are generally
provided to the Departments of State and Defense and are not routinely
shared with the White House. Accordingly, the Departments of State and
Defense are in the best position to provide you information about their
practices for handling ICRC reports. It is my understanding, however,
that ICRC practice is to limit dissemination of their reports and often
to provide copies only to local military commanders in order to maintain
a confidential working relationship with the military units responsible,
for detention of prisoners of war and other detainees.
Condoleezza Rice
Assistant to the President
tor National security Affairs
The Honorable Ike Skelton
House of Representatives
Washington; D.C. 20515-2504
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE
REVIEW AUTHORITY: WILLIAM E LANDFAIR
DATE/CASE 10: 26 OCT 2004 100303827
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
RELEASED IN FULL
WHITE HOUSE
SITUATION ROOM
TIME OF TRANSMISSION
2004 MAY 20 AM 10:00
PRECEDENCE: PRIORITY
CLASSIFICATION: UNCLASSIFIED
FROM: NSC PH: 456-9425 ROOM:
WWD
SUBJECT: LETTER FROM REP SKELTON RE FEB
04 REPORT OF THE INTL
COMMITTEE OF THE RED CROSS
PAGES: 5
PLEASE DELIVER TO:
STATE: COLIN POWELL, SECRETARY OF
STATE
DEFENSE: DONALD RUMSFELD, SECRETARY
OF DEFENSE
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE
REVIEW AUTHORITY: WILLIAM E LANDFAIR
DATE/CASE ID: 26 OCT 2004 200303827
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
RELEASED IN PART B5
IKE SKELTON
4th District, Missouri
CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
WASHINGTON, DC 20515-25-4
May 10, 2004
The President
The White House
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President:
I have a copy of the February 2004 Report
of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) on the Treatment
By the Coalition Forces of Prisoners of War and Other Protected Persons
by the Geneva Conventions in Iraq During Arrest, Internment, and
Interrogation.
As this report was dated February 2004
and Members of Congress did not find out about the issue of prisoner
mistreatment until early May by way of the media, my question is
three-fold:
1) When was the President or his
Administration given a copy of the ICRC report?
2) When was Secretary Powell or his staff
at the State Department given a copy of the ICRC report?
3) When was Secretary Rumsfeld or
his staff at the Department of Defense given a copy of the ICRC report?
According to an article by David S. Cloud
in today's Wall Street Journal entitled, "Red Cross Cited Detainee Abuse
Over a Year Ago,"
"It could not be learned last night how widely read the
ICRC report was among senior Bush administration officials. U.S.
officials said yesterday that Secretary of State Colin Powell, for
instance, had raised the problems with detention procedures at several
high-level administration meetings this year. A State Department
official said last night that he couldn't say when Mr. Powell first saw
the report. But he noted that the ICRC had been making
recommendations and raising concerns for a long time, and that Mr.
Powell and other administration officials had been aware of that."
Please explain why this issue was not
brought to the attention of Members of Congress whose committee
responsibilities include oversight of the U.S. military and U.S. foreign
affairs.
Sincerely,
IKE SKELTON
Member of Congress
IS:lb
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF STATE
REVIEW AUTHORITY: WILLIAM E LANDFAIR
DATE/CASE ID: 29 OCT 2004 200303827
UNCLASSIFIED
[Delete] Fwd. GTMO matters
From: [Delete]
To: [Delete]
Date: Mon, Dec 16, 2002 3:23 PM
Subject: Fwd: GTMO matters
b6 -1
b7C -1
[Delete]
Looks like we are stuck in the mud with
the interview approach of the military vrs. law enforcement. We need to
establish a Bureau policy laying out the boundaries for the interview
process. Apparently, CITF is formulating a policy for their
agents.
The attached is a draft that is being
worked on down at GTMO [delete]
Let me know what you think.
[Delete]
[Delete]
SECRET
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Date of transcription: 11/25/2002
Investigation on 11/25/2002 at Guantanamo
Bay, Cuba
File # 265A-MM-C99102
by Det. [Delete]
DETAINEES-3117
On 11/25/2002 [delete] was interviewed at
Camp Delta, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. The interview was conducted by
FBI Task Force Officer Det. [delete] was [delete]. The results of
the interview are as follows:
[Delete] was asked if any changes had
occurred in the detainee camp over the weekend. He said that he was
given a paper by the guards indicating that there would be four
basic classes of detainees with regard to privilege/discipline
issues. An isolation unit would be utilized for serious violators
of camp regulations. All rewards and punishment are to be based on
camp behavior and cooperation with investigators. Rewards that may be
given to detainees include cold water and the ability to store food in
their cells. [Delete] sees these new rules as a positive step in
soliciting the cooperation of the detainees.
[Delete] said he experienced punishment
at the camp on one prior occasion about [delete] months ago.
He, along [delete]. He was placed in the isolation unit [delete].
He now regrets his actions in the [delete] incident and says that
participating with the other detainees in the water [delete] was a
mistake.
[Delete]
Page 2
[Delete]
The interviewer probed [Delete] on his
guilt or innocence based on the facts of his detainment. It was
mentioned that if [delete] was truly innocent, he should have no
hesitation answering any questions posed by interviewers. If, on
the other hand, [delete] was guilty of some crime, [delete] should admit
his mistake(s) and move ahead with his life in the hopes of one day
being released from custody. [Delete] volunteered that he has not
been overly enthusiastic about being interviewed during Ramadan.
With 10 days of Ramadan left, [delete] promised that he would be willing
to answer any questions that this interviewer poses to him, without an "R.T.N."
response, after Ramadan ends. [Delete] was told that no promises
could be made to him at this time with regard to when he is called for
his next interview.
Page 3
[Delete]
[Delete]
[Delete]
[Delete] was asked if he ever thought he
would be going home. He asked the interviewer if he wanted the
truth and then said that the other detainees [delete] [delete] and this
helps to keep him strong. He was never as religious as he is now.
He has been heavily influenced by the other detainees around him.
[Delete] was reminded of his answer to a
question posed during his previous interview relating to if he had ever
met USAMA BIN LADEN. When the interview told him that he (the
interviewer) would like to meet and interview UBL, [delete] smiled
broadly and seemed genuinely pleased and intrigued. He then asked
the interviewer if he would also like to meet [delete] [delete] was
asked again if he had ever met UBL. While not directly answering
it, [delete] replied that it would not be unusual for someone to have
met UBL [delete. He denied that anyone from the Middle East having
met UBL [delete] would achieve celebrity status considering the vast
amounts of sympathizers and followers they both have.
The interview was then concluded.
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Precedence: DEADLINE 10/24/2003
Date: 10/21/2003
To: Counterterrorism
Attn: A/SC [delete]
ITOS II Rm 4972 JEH
SA [delete]
Conus II, Rm 5432 TEH
Attn: SSA [delete]
Eurasian, CD-IC, Rm 4323 JEH
Attn: SA [delete]
Attn: SA [delete]
Attn: SA [delete]
Attn: SA [delete]
Attn: [delete]
From: CIRG
NCAVC/BAU I
Contact: SSA [delete]
Approved By: [delete]
Drafted By: [delete]
Case ID # IV-IR-A-6033-NCAVC (Pending)
Title: INTERVIEW AND INTERROGATION
OF EXTREMISTS WORKING GROUP
CRITICAL INCIDENT RESPONSE GROUP (CIRG)
NATIONAL CENTER FOR THE ANALYSIS OF VIOLENT CRIME (NCAVC)
BEHAVIORAL ANALYSIS UNIT I (BAU I)
11/04-07/2003
Synopsis: The purpose of
this working group is to bring together personnel with background in
terrorist investigations and incorporate this information into a
practical guide for personnel involved in conducting interviews both in
the field and in controlled environments such as in Guantanamo Bay.
Details: The Behavioral Analysis
Unit I (BAU I) is one of several National Center for the Analysis of
Violent Crime (NCAVC) units within the Critical Incident Response Group
(CIRG) in Quantico, Virginia, providing support to field offices as well
as to state, local, and foreign police. Although the NCAVC is best
known for providing behavioral analyses on violent crime cases, i.e.,
serial murder, sexual assault and child abduction, stalking, etc., the
NCAVC has considerable experience in the area of terrorism and threat
assessment. In recognition of the changing nature of FBI
priorities, and in order to be more responsive to requesting offices,
the NCAVC recently reorganized and established a unit (BAU I) which
focuses on matters involving terrorism and threat assessment.
Services offered by BAU I will continue to include crime scene analysis,
personality assessment, interview strategies analysis of threatening
communications and investigative suggestions.
Of particular interest and concern to BAU
I, especially amidst our war on terrorism, is how the FBI can best
obtain information from those involved in terrorist activities.
The FBI has successfully investigated a wide range of domestic and
international terrorist groups throughout the years and a host of
dangerous domestic terrorist groups. The recent attacks against
U.S. interests and citizens in New York, Virginia, Lebanon, Saudi
Arabia, East Africa, Indonesia, Baghdad, and other places, highlight the
need to better understand, not only the midset of those terrorist, but
also the cultural, political, and economic influences which may have
cont4ributed to their decision to align themselves with extremist
causes. More important, BAU I is interested in learning how we can
better elicit information from these individuals either as sources,
subjects, suspects, witnesses or victims.
Of the thousands of persons involved in
terrorist investigations, the above-listed individuals have come to the
attention of BAU I as a sample of those who have been particularly
successful in obtaining information from terrorists and their associates
or in developing excellent sources. Although, ideally, BAU I would
like to include all personnel who have had successes in the terrorist
arena, it is believed that the use of a small working group, initially,
will be more conducive to capturing the understanding and organizing a
voluminous amount of information.
BAU I is inviting these individuals to
the CIRG facility in Stafford, Virginia, for a two-day working group on
11/05-06/2003, in order to debrief them in detail about their successes
and failures and to better understand the elements of their personality
experiences, approaches, and other factors which contributed to their
information and, hopefully, incorporate it into a practical guide for
individuals involved in conducting interviews both in the field and in
controlled environments such as in Guantanamo Bay. Although a
comprehensive guide may not be possible as a result of one seminar, BAU
I believes this is a first step in collecting important details from the
recent valuable experiences and insights from these individuals to
benefit future investigative and operational requirements.
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Precedence: ROUTINE
Date: 10/06/2003
To: Counterterrorism
Attn: SC Frankie Battle
Rm 4712 JEH
UC [delete]
Rm 5382 JEH
SA [delete]
Rm 1B223 JEH
SA [delete]
Rm 4383 JEH
SA [delete]
Rm 5999 JEH
SA [delete]
Rm 5258 JEH
SA [delete]
Rm 8672 JEH
IOS [delete]
Rm 8672 JEH
Security
Attn: SA [delete]
Polygraph Unit, GRB 2
CIRG
Attn: UC [delete]
UC [delete]
UC [delete]
SSA [delete]
IRS [delete]
MA [delete]
MA [delete]
Baltimore
Attn: SA [delete]
Chicago
Attn: SA [delete]
Miami
Attn: SA [delete]
Milwaukee
Attn: SA [delete]
Madison RA
New York
Attn: SA [delete]
SA [delete]
SA [delete]
SA [delete]
SA [delete]
SA [delete]
SA [delete]
SA [delete]
Philadelphia
Attn: SA [delete]
Pittsburgh
Attn: IOS [delete]
Phoenix
Attn: SA [delete]
SA [delete]
San Diego
Attn: SA [delete]
Seattle
Attn: SA [delete]
From: CIRG
DETAINEES-2746
Questions Concerning FBI Personnel
ActivitIes at Abu Ghurayb Prison - IRAQ
Time period: October 2003 - December 2003
1. Did you observe any misconduct
or mistreatment of prisoners at any time during your presence at Abu
Ghurayb prison? No.
2. Old you have any reason to believe
that any misconduct or mistreatment of detainees at Abu Ghurayb was
occurring? These reasons could include casual observations,
prisoner appearance or demeanor, or conversation with prison personnel.
No.
3. Did interviews conducted by you and
members of your team comport with prescribed Department of Justice
and/or FBI protocols? Yes.
4. Please identify where the interviews
occurred in the prison.
5. Were they ever held in Unit 1Aor 1B
(where the abuses occurred)?
6. Did you have any substantive
contact with Military Police personnel in charge of the prison? If so,
who?
7. Please explain the roles of
members which composed your interview team? N/A.
8. During your interviews did any
interviewee bring to your attention any acts of misconduct or
mistreatment by U.S. personnel? No.
9. Are you in possession of any pictures,
video tapes, or notes of actions depicting misconduct or inappropriate
behavior by U.S. personnel against detainees? Are you aware of
anyone else who is in possession of such items? No.
10. What, if any, was your
understanding of Department of Defense and/or Department of Justice
authorization for the permitted use of certain interrogation techniques?
11. If you were aware of any
mistreatment or abuse of detainees, did you document or report it to
anyone? No.
12. Do you have any additional
information relating to the abuse/mistreatment of detainees?
DETAINEES-3514
hgb:bgb
297-HQ-A1327669-E3
On May 17, 2004, SA [delete] was
contacted telephonically at the Little Rock Division's El Dorado RA, by
SSA [delete] concerning FBI personnel activities at Abu Ghurayb Prison
to which he provided the following information.
SA [delete] advised that during the
course of the interviews he conducted of [delete] and [delete] [delete]
at no time did he observe any misconduct or mistreatment of prisoners at
any time during his presence at ABU Ghurayb prison.
SA [delete] advised that he did not have
reason to believe that any misconduct or mistreatment of detainees at
ABU Ghurayb was occurring nor did anyone ever volunteer any information
to him that any mistreatment of prisoners had occurred. He further
stated that all interviews conducted by him and/or members of his team
comported with FBI protocols.
SA [delete] advised the interview
conducted by him of [delete] took place in an isolated area of the
prison whereas the interview of [delete] took place in the office of the
Military Intelligence (MI). During the interviews SA [delete] was
assisted by [delete] (MI) and SSG [delete] U.S. Army and a translator.
SA [delete] advised that he never felt a
need to have an understanding of Department of Defense and/or Department
of Justice authorization for permitted use of certain interrogation
techniques. That was because he was a bomb technician and he was
there for "intel" and evaluation. He also stated that he does not
have any pictures, video tapes, or notes of actions depicting misconduct
or inappropriate behavior by U.S. personnel against detainees or was not
aware of anyone else who was in possession of such items.
SA [delete] advised that if he was aware
of any mistreatment or abuse of detainees, he would have reported the
inappropriate actions to the authorities.
DETAINEES-3463
297-HQ-A1327 6697-E
HGB. hgb
On May 18, 2004, SA [delete] was
contacted telephonically [delete] at the [delete] in DOHA QATAR by SSA
[delete] concerning FBI personnel activities at Abu Ghurayb Prison to
which he provided the following information:
SA [delete] advised that during his time
at the ABU Ghurayb Prison his role was to only process and fingerprint
prisoners and at no time did he observe any misconduct or mistreatment
of prisoners at any time during his presence at ABU Ghurayb prison.
SA [delete] processed prisoners at two separate locations, on two
occasions he processed detainees inside the ABU Ghurayb prison in a side
storage room off to the side of the prison cell block. He didn't
recall if that area actually had a particular name. The second
location where he processed the majority of the detainees was outside in
a tent on the ABU Ghurayb prison grounds. SA [delete] stated the
processing of the detainees occurred around October 2003, generally
between the hours of 10am to 5pm, two to three times per week. SA
[delete] further reiterated that he did not interview any of the
detainees.
SA [delete] advised that he did not have
reason to believe that any misconduct or mistreatment of detainees at
ABU Ghurayb was occurring in Unit 1A or 1B nor did anyone ever volunteer
any information to him that any mistreatment of prisoners had occurred.
SA [delete] advised that he never felt a
need to have an understanding of Department of Defense and/or Department
of Justice authorization for permitted use of certain interrogation
techniques. That was because he was only at the prison to pro and
fingerprint prisoners. He also stated that he does not have any
pictures, video tapes, or notes of actions depicting misconduct or
inappropriate behavior by U.S. personnel against detainees or was not
ware of anyone else who was in possession of such items.
SA [delete] advised that he had no
additional information relating to the abuse of detainees and if he had
been aware of any mistreatment or abuse he would have reported the
inappropriate actions to the authorities.
DETAINEES-3464
297-HQ-A13276691-E-3
KBC . kc
The following investigation was conducted
by AI [delete] [delete] INSD, on 05/17/2004 in New York, NY:
SA [delete] NYO, Squad CD-22, [delete]
DOB. [delete] SSAN. [delete] was interviewed. He was advised of
the identity of AI [delete] and the nature of the interview. He
provided the following information:
SA [delete] deployed to IRaq on or about
11/13/2003 through 01/16/2004. His primary duties while in Iraq
consisted of conducting FCI interviews at Camp Cropper in the vicinity
of Baghdad International Airport. He worked primarily with SA
[delete] [delete] He went to Abu Ghurayb prison on approximately
five occasions. On one occasion he was searching for a "ghost"
detainee through both cell blocks and the tent compound, but did not
locate him. He described a "ghost" detainee as someone detained at
the prison by intelligence personnel without any record of the
detainee's presence. He did not know how many such detainees
existed. On one occasion he processed for fingerprinting and DNA
approximately 25-50 detainees at the prison. He also introduced a
detainee whose name he could not recall to the Iraqi Survey Group (ISG)
because of the WMD knowledge that detainee possessed. The ISG was
U.S. military, to the best of his recollection. He also dealt with
Department of Defense (DOD) personnel who were civilian clothes.
He believed they represented Defense Intelligence Agency.
Other than his search for the "ghost"
detainee in the cell blocks, he interviewed detainees in the stand alone
buildings known as "wood" and "steel," respectively. He actually
interviewed teh "ghost" detainee prior to the search on one occasion and
saw no signs of abuse. The detainee was subsequently released, and
that is why SA [delete] could not locate him during the search.
These stand-alone buildings were located outside the cell blocks.
Those detainees were from the tent compound, not the main cell blocks.
He recalled interviewing [delete] with SA [delete] [delete] was a tent
compound detainee. The detainee was delivered to the stand alone
building by MPs who did not participate in the interview. The
detainee was brought to the interview in hand cuffs. He also saw
detainees wearing hoods while they were escorted on the prison grounds.
SA [delete] did not observe any
misconduct or mistreatment of prisoners at any time during his presence
at Abu Ghurayb prison. He conducted a thorough search of all the
cells in the prison for the "ghost" detainee and saw no evidence of any
mistreatment or misconduct.
SA [delete] had no reason to believe that
any misconduct or mistreatment of detainees was occurring at the prison.
While processing numerous (25-50) detainees for fingerprints and DNA
samples, he noticed no marks or signs of abuse on the prisoners.
He did not recall meeting the guards who were depicted in the media
allegedly abusing prisoners in the prison.
SA [delete] advised his interviews
conducted at Camp Cropper and Abu Ghurayb prison were reported via EC.
He did not advise detainees of their Miranda Warning rights, and could
not recall why. His interviews always took place in the stand
alone buildings previously described and none of his interviewees were
housed in units 1A or 1B. He had no substantive contact with
Military Police personnel in charge of the prison. The only other
member of his interview team at the prison was SA [delete]. He did
not recall a translator being present because the subject of the
interview spoke English.
During his interviews, no interviewee
brought to his attention any acts of misconduct or mistreatment by U.S.
personnel. He was in possession of no pictures, video tapes, or
notes of actions depicting misconduct or inappropriate behavior by U.S.
personnel against detainees. He was not aware of anyone in
possession of such items. He had no knowledge of DOD or DOJ
authorization for the use of certain interrogation techniques. He
and other interviewers, including the MI handlers, would discuss
interview strategies as to whether or not the interview would use a
positive, rapport building tone, or an accusatorial, negative tone.
No discussion or thought was given to using physical interrogation
techniques during any interview. He had no knowledge of sleep
deprivation or isolation used on detainees. He had no additional
information relating to the abuse/mistreatment of detainees.
297-HQ-A13276691-E-3
CMR
The following investigation was conducted
by Supervisory Special Agent (SSA) [delete] in Portland, Oregon on May
18, 2004.
Special Agent {SA) [delete] assigned to
the Fly Away/Rapid Deployment Team at FBI Headquarters (FBIHQ) provided
the following information:
SA [delete] started work with the FBI on
[delete]. His FBIHQ extension is [delete] and cell phone is
[delete]. In his capacity as an SA assigned to the Fly Away Team,
he served in Iraq from 11/05/2003 until 01/30/2004. As one of his
duties in Iraq, he interviewed detainees at Abu Ghurayb Prison. As
a result, the following questions were posed to SA [delete].
1. Did you observe any misconduct
or mistreatment of prisoners at any time during your presence at Abu
Ghurayb prison?
Response: SA [delete] stated he did
not observe any mistreatment of the nature, or extent, as recently
reported by the media. SA [delete] stated he observed three
incidents that caught his attention. On one occasion at Abu
Ghurayb Prison, SA [delete] observed military personnel restraining a
detainee. The detainee was spread eagle
on a mattress on the floor and yelling and flailing.
The military personnel advised SA [delete] the detainee
was mentally ill. The detainee was covered with a blanket.
SA [delete] also thinks he remembers observing an IV bag for the
detainee. SA [delete] stated his observations were consistent with
military personnel attempting to assist
a mentally ill person. SA [delete] also noted the prison held
numerous mentally ill detainees.
The second incident consisted of a
detainee, either naked or wearing boxer shorts, lying prone on the wet
floor. There was one military person in the vicinity, but no
one was interacting with the detainee.
The third incident consisted of a
detainee standing on the second floor of the prison and handcuffed to a
waist high railing. An empty green nylon sand bag was placed over
the detainee's head. The prisoner was draped in a shower curtain.
The military personnel advised SA [delete] the detainee was
being subjected to sleep deprivation. SA [delete] observed a
military policeman (MP) lightly slap the detainee on the back. The
slap was not hard, and consistent with someone trying to assure the
detainee did not fall asleep.
2. Did you have any reason to
believe that any misconduct or mistreatment of detainees at Abu Ghurayb
was occurring? These reasons could include casual observations,
prisoner appearance or demeanor, or conversations with various
personnel.
Response: No, other than the
limited observations documented in the response to question number one.
SA [delete] noted there was documentation and limited conversation
related to "Ego Up and Ego Down," and "Fear Up and Fear Down," referring
to the detainees. Before SA [delete] was able to conduct
interviews in the prison, he was required to sign a Military
Intelligence (MI) document delineating the interview techniques allowed,
and those requiring specific approval. The document appeared to be
a standard form, and applicable to agencies wanting to conduct
interviews of detainees. SA [delete] thinks the document
specifically mentioned "Ego Up and Ego Down," as well as "Fear Up and
Fear Down". SA [delete] noted sleep deprivation was not on the
list of permissible interview activities, but required a specific
request. SA [delete] stated he generally discussed the form,
read the form, and signed the form. He did not maintain a copy of
the form.
3. Did interview conducted by you
and members of your team comport with prescribed Department of Justice
and/or FBI protocols?
Response: Yes. SA [delete]
noted he was not aware of any specific DOJ or FBI protocols established
for the detainee interviews. He said he did not give the
detainees Miranda rights, but stated he was conducting the interview for
intelligence information. SA [delete] added that he, and his
associates, treated the interviewees professionally and humanely at all
times.
4. Please identify where the
interviews occurred in the prison.
Response: SA [delete] stated each
of his interviews was conducted in an interview facility called the
"wood site." It was called the wood site because it was a
structure built of wood. It was located approximately 150 yards
from the security cell block portion of the main prison. The "wood
site" consisted of six interview rooms. Each room held a plastic table
and plastic or metal chairs. Each room also had one door, a one
way glass/mirror for persons outside the room to observe the interview,
and an air conditioning/heating unit.
SA [delete] stated the interviewees would
be removed from the main prison and escorted to the interview site, the
"wood site." Per prison regulations, the prisoners were
escorted in handcuffs and hoods. For the first interviews
conducted by SA [delete] the detainee was escorted by MI or other
military police personnel. Later, SA [delete] sometimes escorted
the detainee from the cell area to the interview site.
5. Were they ever held in Units 1A
or 1B (where the abuses occurred)?
Response: SA [delete] stated he
was not aware of the 1A or 1B classification for areas of the prison,
nor was he aware of the specific area in question. He stated
he obtained his detainees from the last wing of the prison. To get
to the wing holding his detainees, he would enter the front of the
prison building and walk down the center corridor. Four or five
wings, on both sides of the central corridor, spoked off from the main
corridor. SA [delete] stated he walked to the last set of wings,
and passed all the wings while traveling to his destination. On
one occasion when SA [delete] interviewed detainee [delete] unidentified
military personnel brought the detainee to SA [delete]. SA [delete]
thought the detainee was in Camp Vigilant, the open air detention camp
next to the Abu Ghurayb Prison. From the wing holding SA [delete]
interview subjects, SA [delete] escorted them out the back door to the
interview building.
6. Did you have any substantive
contact with Military Police Personnel in charge of the prison? If
so, who?
Response: SA [delete] stated his
conversations with Military Police personnel in charge of the prison
were frequent, but not substantive nor related to interviews other than
in general terms. Relative to Military Intelligence personnel, SA
[delete] noted he met Colonel [delete] on one occasion. He did not
hold any substantive conversation with the Colonel.
SA [delete] met Lt. Colonel [delete] on
several occasions because of attempted prison escapes, prisoner
uprisings, a shooting incident inside the high security cellblock, and
attacks on the prison from the surrounding village. They did not
discuss interview techniques.
SA [delete] met both Captain [delete] and
Major [delete]. SA [delete] thinks Captain [delete] was in charge
of the MI interview teams. SA [delete] conversed with both
officers on several occasions, but did not discuss specific interview
techniques. SA [delete] noted he knew how he was going to
proceed on his interviews, and knew his procedures were within DOJ and
FBI parameters. SA [delete] stated he introduced other
interviewers to Major [delete].
SA [delete] said his primary prison
contact person was Chief Warrant Officer [delete]. Chief [delete]
supervised the Sgts. and Specialists responsible for scheduling and
monitoring interviews. On several occasions, SA [delete] discussed
his proposed interview approaches for specific detainees, with Chief
[delete]. SA [delete] indicated his intent, to Chief [delete] to
pursue a lengthy and professional series of interviews with a detainee.
At no time did Chief [delete] suggest a more aggressive approach for the
interviews.
7. Please explain the role of
members which comprised your interview team.
Response: SA [delete] said he
primarily interviewed detainee [delete]. SA [delete] primary
counterpart in the interviews was SA [delete] SA [delete] served
as a translator and co-interviewer. After SA [delete] left the
country, []delete] served as a translator in the interviews. On
one occasion, Intelligence Analyst [delete] served as an observer and
note taker. On one occasion, [delete] served as a linguist during
an interview. On another occasion, SA [delete] served as a
co-interviewer with SA [delete].
9. During your interviews, did
any interviewee bring to your attention any acts of misconduct or
mistreatment by U.S. personnel?
Response: No. During the
first interviews with detainee [delete] complained of commotion and
screaming at night. SA [delete] said he interpreted the detainee's
statements as possible surmise
on the detainee's part that other detainees might be subject to torture.
SA [delete] said the detainee was in a cell with a solid door and walls,
so was unable to report on anything he observed. SA [delete] also
perceived the detainee's complaint of hearing screams as
"posturing" to support his early anti U.S. position,
as well as a complaint
regarding lack of sleep. SA [delete] noted the prison was a very
noisy environment with frequent wailing and/or yelling. SA [delete
does not recall his interview subjects complaining of abuse to
themselves, or to anyone else in the prison. At one point,
detainee [delete] complained of not being able to see a doctor. SA
[delete] arranged for doctor visits to detainee [delete].
9. Are you in possession of any
pictures, video tapes, or notes of actions depicting misconduct or
inappropriate behavior by U.S. personnel against detainees? Are
you aware of anyone else who is in possession of such items?
Response: No / No.
10. What, if any, was your
understanding of Department of Defense and/or Department of Justice
authorization for the permitted use of certain interrogation techniques?
Response: SA [delete] stated that
other than the initial DOD form he signed prior to conducting
interviews, he was not aware of DOD authorizations or techniques
regarding interviews. SA [delete] said the DOD techniques were
irrelevant to his interviews. SA [delete] stated he did not
have any understanding of altered DOJ interview standards, other than
not utilizing Miranda warnings.
11. If you were aware of any
mistreatment or abuse of detainees, did you document or report it to
anyone?
Response: Not applicable.
12. Do you have any additional
information relating to the abuse/mistreatment of detainees?
Response: No. SA [delete]
wanted to note the difference in his interview techniques between
detainee [delete] and detainee [delete]. SA [delete] noted
detainee [delete] was a potential long term interview subject with
information of possible value over a period of time. Conversely,
detainee [delete] was thought to hold information of immediate value
only. As a result, the interview technique with detainee [delete]
was more aggressive. The techniques included yelling and
hitting the table. SA [delete] stated they did not, at any
time, threaten the detainees with abuse or harm, or harm a detainee.
SA [delete] noted he provided
amenities to one detainee/interviewee. SA [delete] brought a light
bulb for the detainee's cell, provided him with polypropolene underwear
and sandals, and provided him a copy of the Koran. SA [delete]
requested the prison guards to treat one detainee, of interview
interest, very professionally. Specifically, SA [delete] requested
the prison personnel to not ridicule or humiliate the detainee, and to
respect his needs for prayer time.
DETAINEES-3484
DETAINEES-3485|
DETAINEES-3486
DETAINEES-3487
DETAINEES-3488
DETAINEES-3489
297-HQ-A13276691-E-3
CMR
The following investigation was conducted
by SSA [delete] on 05/21/2004. The information was gathered from a
telephonic follow up interview, of SA [delete] to a personal interview
between SSA [delete] and SA [delete] on 05/18/2004.
SA [delete] provided information
concerning the reference, from his prior conversation with SSA [delete]
to his request that prison guards not "ridicule or humiliate" a specific
detainee. SA [delete] stated he did not observe any physical
harassment of detainees, other than the examples he previously noted.
He observed the prison guards verbally harassing and ridiculing the
detainees. It was never aggressive, but was degrading.
As an example, SA [delete] observed
the guards give the detainees cleaning supplies and ordered them to
scrub the floors. He observed the orders given in a "theatrical
and humiliating" manner, that is the guards ordered the detainees to
clean "their" (meaning the guard's) floor and repeatedly yelled orders
to the detainees. SA [delete] described the treatment as constant
verbal haranguing. SA [delete] noted the treatment was not unlike
treatment he had observed in U.S. prisons/jails.
SA [delete] stated he requested the
guards spare the specific detainee the "ridicule and humiliation" not
because SA [delete] was concerned for the safety of the detainee, but
because SA [delete] wanted the detainee to think SA [delete] had the
power to change the detainee's environment. SA [delete] requested
the guards call the specific detainee by his true name.
DETAINEES-3492
297-HQ-A13276691-E-3
ELM elm
On 05/18/2004, Language Specialist (LS)
[delete] EOD [delete] telephone number [delete] assigned to FBI Houston,
was contacted by SSA [delete] [delete] at the J. Edgar Hoover Building,
FBIHQ, Washington, D.C. regarding his knowledge concerning FBI personnel
activities at Abu Ghurayb Prison, Baghdad, Iraq. [Delete] provided the
following information:
[Delete] stated that between 09/12/2003
through 11/11/2003, he served as an interpreter at the Abu Ghurayb
prison. During that time, he did not observe any misconduct of
mistreatment of prisoners. [Delete] stated that on one occasion,
he witnessed one military police (MP) officer yelling in the face of a
prisoner who did not understand the directions of the MP. This
particular incident stood out because several agents, and MPs were
around and witnessed the MP shouting and "talking down" to the prisoner.
However, no observations of physical contact or abuse were noted.
[Delete] advised that he was part of
interview teams that consisted of at least two FBI agents, two HRT
members, and him. The agents, [delete] (phonetic), from FBI El
Paso, and [delete] NU, from FBI Los Angeles were [delete] primary team
members. [Delete] [delete] stated that all contact with the
prisoners was conducted in either an office outside the cell blocks, an
air conditioned tent, or a fixed office building (similar to a trailer)
detached from the cell blocks, but on the Abu Ghurayb Prison compound.
[Delete] stated that all prisoners were afforded water, restroom breaks,
and chairs. Detainees were placed in comfortable settings and
agents went out of their way to treat all detainees with dignity and
respect. On several occasions, FBI agents delivered messages
to family members of detainees. All interviews were conducted in a
professional manner and in accordance with Department of Defense and/or
Department of Justice protocols. [Delete] stated that FBI
employees went out of their way to ensure each detainee was treated with
dignity and respect.
[Delete] stated that during his
interviews with detainees, on three occasions, prisoners brought to his
team's attention acts of abuse had taken place prior to arriving at Abu
Ghurayb Prison. [Delete] stated that his interviews determined
those acts of abuse occurred during arrests by military personnel
further described as non-American (presumed to be Iraqi Military).
Examples of the reported acts of abuse included being kicked in the
stomach, electric shock, threats to harm family members, and one burn
victim. The burn victim, an Iraqi Intelligence Officer (IO)
was the only individual [delete] recalled contacting outside the prison
compound. This individual was a patient in a Baghdad hospital and
was contacted there several times by himself and SA [delete] [delete]
stated that FBI Agents took pictures of all injuries, even those which
occurred prior to the incarcerations at the AGP. These findings
were documented on the FD-302's of interviewing agents.
[Delete] advised that he had limited
contact with MPs. Aside from FBI personnel, his other contact
would have been with individuals [delete] who accompanied him to a few
interviews. [Delete] stated that only agents had direct contact
with MPs. His role as the translator did not lend itself to other
outside contacts. [Delete] advised that during the time in Abu
Ghurayb Prison, he did not record, photograph, or video tape any
instances of abuse nor did he have the same in his possession.
Other than what was reported above, [delete] was not aware of any
improprieties resulting in the abuse of prisoners as described on
television today.
DETAINEES-3493
DETAINEES-3494

[Delete]
1. No misconduct or mistreatment.
3-4 times detainee ordered to strip. [illegible ] in isolation
[illegible] w/no clothes.
2. Yes. One instance in which
detainee complained about being stripped naked, kept naked and
[illegible] [illegible] deprivation [illegible] roughed up by
[illegible]. Detainee was [big illegible] in military uniforms
[illegible] him. Detainee was in [illegible] about 8 times, DYNG &
[illegible] 1 hr. was [illegible] [illegible] to [delete] [illegible]
[delete] Anssar Al Islam - no physical [illegible] [illegible]
[illegible] ties w/Al Qaeda. SA [delete] [illegible]
3. As [illegible].
4. Interrogation rooms.
Different [illegible] buildings within prison compound, [illegible]
[illegible] 6 rooms in [illegible] building. 2 rooms [illegible]
w/windows. [Illegible]
DETAINEES-3502

L.S. [delete], Houston, Texas EOD
[delete] [illegible] Time in Baghdad Houston; LS [delete]
1. Observed yelling in face and
prisoner not understanding shouting at prisoner's face -- no physical
contact "Talking down -- don't eyeball me -- [illegible] loud voices --
one of the military guys.
(Only [illegible] for 5 wks) - 2 SA
[delete] El Paso [delete] LA
No -- other than above.
2. No -- (End of Oct) [illegible]
Transferred prisoners
3. Yes, Very prof. water.
chair. comfortable. out of their way.
(1) One prisoner - [delete] Al Najaf
bombing suspect described he was tortured Badan group (non-Amer).
Burned with elec. shocks & [illegible] No Amer.
(2) UN bomb suspect -- FBI released said
when he was arrested he was kicked in stomach by Military [illegible ].
(3) Hospital Al-Anni Iraqi I.D. -- Burns
over body told came during arrest in [illegible]

-- which was hot and caused burns over
body [illegible] SA [delete] El Paso determined [illegible] (Suspect &
I.D.) [Delete] [illegible]
Prof team in dealing w/prisoners -- all
[illegible] of SA -- Very respectful. [Illegible] needs messages
to family.
[Delete] [illegible] outside prison --
Outside cells
4. In a room located in tent -
Bungalo Trailer - [illegible] fixture w/[illegible] Rooms & air.
Prisoner to them.
5. Don't Know -- Not sure where
there are pictures on TV are [illegible] But not sure.
6. Very minimal contact.
Agents w/PP.
None.
7. LS, 2-0 agents did Al Anni
(Hosp). Prisoner w/2 people HRT outside.

8. Other before.
9. No & No. Nothing from him
or people talking.
10. Don't recall anything other
than [illegible] at that time he didn't know at time their interview
[illegible] "Good Guys."
11. Others were there no need to
report. Everything was shared to agents.
12. No. Muslims -- taking
clothes off. Not sure if truth or not.
DETAINEES-3515
DETAINEES-3516
DETAINEES-3517

297-HQ-A13276697-E-3
[Delete]
5/21
True in theory
observed [illegible]
harassing & ridiculing in [illegible]
name calling and verbal harassment
not aggressive -- but degrading to
inmates
because I wanted detainee to know I had
power to change his environment
asked they call him by true name & allow
dignity -- was when I gave light bulb
not observed physical harassment of
detainee
saw guards frequently, request detainees
to clean/scrub cells [illegible] in humiliating way -- guard give
cleaning supplies & almost in theatrical manner yell to [illegible] my
floor was clean." Inmate appeared humiliated by constant orders &
DETAINEES-3521
[Delete] INSD) (FBI)
From: [Delete]
Sent: Satuday, May 22, 2004 12 23
PM
To: Caproni, Valerie E (OGC) (FBI)
Cc: [Delete] INSD) (FBI). [Delete]
(INSD) (FBI)
Subject: RE Post report
UNCLASSIFIED
NON-RECORD
Valerie, We are ready to launch on the
other interviews and as you know there is zero indication of this thus
far.
---Original Message---
From: Caproni, Valerie E. (Div09) (FBI)
Sent: Saturday, May 22, 2004 12 17 PM
To: CHANDLER, CASSANDRA M. (Div00) (FBI), LAISCH, ELENI P.
(Div000) (FBI) WAINSTEIN, KENNETH L. (Div00) (FBI), MUELLER, ROBERT S.
III (Div00) (FBI), MCCRAW, STEVEN C.; GEBHARDT, BRUCE J. (Div00) (FBI)
Cc: BRIESE, M.C. (Div13) (FBI); HARRINGTON, T.J. (Div13) (FBI)
Subject: Post report
UNCLASSIFIED
NON-RECORD
According to the Washington Post, one of
the MPs that gave a statement in the Abu Ghraib prison investigation
said that FBI was involved in the abuse. We are going to try to
get a copy of the statement and see if there is anything we can do to
follow up. As of right now, my information is that because of the
danger at the prison, our people never spent the night.
UNCLASSIFIED
DETAINEES-3527
[Delete] (IR) (FBI)
From: [Delete]
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2004 3:42 PM
To: [Delete] (IR) (FBI)
Subject: current events
for a better understanding of the issue
we spoke about, one should read not only the bau ec, but the attachments
as well.
[delete] is here with me and should
anyone be interested, he could illuminate a lot about gen miller's view
on interrogation. [delete] was the miami case agent for 14 months.
from what cnn reports, gen karpinsky
at abu gharib said that gen miller came to the prison several months ago
and told her they wanted to "gimotize" abu gharib. i am not sure
what this means. however, if this refers to intell gathering as i
suspect, it suggests he has continued to support interrogation
strategies we not only advised against, but questioned in terms of
effectiveness.
yesterday, however, we were surprised
to read an article in stars and stripes, in which gen miller is quoted
as saying that he believes in the rapport-building approach. this
is not what he was saying at gitmo when i was there. [delete] and
i did cart wheels. the battles fought in gitmo while gen miller he
was there are on the record.
check out not only the bau ec but one
written by miami division. [delete] should know about this as
should [delete] in san francisco. it's a must read. [delete]
knows these issue quite well and has also fought battles. has
anyone checked with [delete]?
[Big delete]
[Big delete]
[Big delete]
DETAINEES-2706
[Delete] (IOR) (FBI)
From: [delete] (Div13) (FBI)
Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 12:26 PM
To: HARRINGTON, T.J. (Div13) (FBI)
Cc: BATTLE, FRANKIE (Div13) (FBI) [delete] (IR) (FBI) [delete]
(Div13) (FBI) [delete] (Div13) (FBI) [delete] (Div13) (FBI), CUMMINGS,
ARTHUR M. (Div13) (FBI)
Subject: Instructions to GTMO interrogators.
SECRET/ORCON, NOFORN
RECORD 315N-MM-C99102
TJ,
I will have to do some digging into
old files [delete] [delete]. We did advise each supervisor that
went to GTMO to stay in line with Bureau policy and not deviate from
that [delete]. I went to GTMO with [delete] early on and we
discussed the effectiveness [delete] with the SSA. We (BAU and
ITOS1) had also met with Generals Dunlevey & Miller explaining our
position (Law Enforcement techniques) vs. DoD. Both agreed the
Bureau has their way of doing business and DoD has their matching orders
from the Sec Def. Although the two techniques differed
drastically, both Generals believed they had a job to accomplish.
It was our mission to gether critical intelligence and evidence [delete]
[delete] in furtherance of FBI cases. In my weekly meetings with
DOJ we often discussed [delete] techniques and how they were not
effective or producing Intel that was reliable. [Delete] (SES}
[delete] [delete] (SES) [delete] (now SES) [delete] at the time) and
[delete] (SES Appointee) all from DOJ Criminal Division attended
meetings with FBI. We all agreed [delete] were going to be an
issue in the military commission cases. I know [delete] brought
this to the attention of [delete].
One specific example was [delete].
Once the Bureau provide DoD with the findings [delete] [delete] they
wanted to pursue expeditiously their methods to get "more out of him"
[delete] We were given a so called deadline to use our traditional
methods. Once oru timeline [delete] was up [delete] took the
reigns. We stepped out of the picture and [delete] ran the
operation [delete. FBI did not participate at the direction of
myself [delete] and BAU UC [delete]. We would receive IIRs on the
results of the process.
I went to GTMO on one occasion to
specifically address the information coming from [delete] [delete].
We (DoD 3 Star Geoff Miller, FBI, CITF [delete] etc) had a VTC with the
Pentagon Detainee Policy Committee. During this VTC I voiced
concerns that the intel produced was nothing more than what FBI got
using simple investigative techniques (following the trail of the
detainee in and out of the US compared to the trail of [delete was
providing [delete] portion of the briefing. [Deleted] was present
at the Pentagon side of the VTC. After allowing [delete] to
produce nothing, I finally voiced my opinion concerning the information.
The conversations were somewhat heated. [Delete] agreed with me.
[delete] finally admitted the information was the same info the Bureau
obtained. It still did not prevent them from continuing the
[delete] methods." DOJ was with me at GTMO [delete] during that
time.
Bottom line is FBI personnel have not
been involved in any methods of interrogation that deviate from our
policy. The specific guidance we have given has always been no
Miranda, otherwise, follow FBI/DOJ policy just as you would in your
field office. Use common sense. Utilize our methods that are
proven (Reed school, etc).
If you would like to call me to discuss
this on the telephone I can be reached at [delete].
---Original Message-----
SECRET
DETAINEES-2709
SECRET
From: HARRINGTON, T.J. (Div13)
(FBI)
Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 9:21 AM
To: [Delete] (Div 13) (FBI)
Subject: RE: pls confirm
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED
NON-RECORD
We have this information, now we are
trying to go beyond did we ever put into writing in an EC, memo, not or
briefing paper to our personnel our position [delete] that we were
pursuing our traditional methods of building trust and a relationship
with subjects. Tom.
---Original Message---
From: [delete] (Div13) (FBI)
Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 10:52AM
To: HARRINGTON, T.J. (Div13) (FBI)
Cc: [delete] (Div13) (FBI); BATTLE, FRANKIE (Div13) (FBI); BOWMAN,
MARION E. (Div09) (FBI)
Subject: RE: pls confirm
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED
NON-RECORD
BAU at the request of the then (GTMO Task
Force, ITOS1) wrote an EC (quite long) explaining the Bureau way of
interrogation vs. DoDs methodology. Our formal guidance has always
been that all personnel conduct themselves in interviews in the manner
that they would in the field. [Delete] [delete] along with FBI
advised taht the LEA (Law Enforcement Agencies) at GTMO were not in the
practice of the using [delete] and were of the opinion results obtained
from these interrogations were [delete]. BAU explained [delete]
FBI has been successful for many years obtaining confessions via
non-confrontational interviewing techniques.
We spoke to FBI OGC with our concerns.
I also brought these matters to the attention of DOJ during detainee
meetings with [delete] express their concerns to [delete].
[delete] has a copy of all the
information regarding the BAU LHM. I believe she has provided that
to TJ Harrington.
I may have more specific information in
my desk at HQ. I will search what I have when I return (5/17).
---Original Message--
From: HARRINGTON, T.J. (Div13) (FBI)
Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 4:33 AM
To: BATTLE, FRANKIE (Div13) (FBI); [delete] (Div 13) (FBI) [delete
[delete] (Div 13) (FBI)
Subject: FW: pls confirm
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED
NON-RECORD
Please review our control files, did we
produce anything on paper???
---Original Message--
From: Caproni, Valerie E. (Div09) (FBI)
Sent: Sunday, May 09, 2004 2:31 PM
To: [delete] (Div09) (FBI); HARRINGTON, T.J. (Div13) (FBI) [delete
SECRET
DETAINEES-2710
[Delete] (IR) (FBI)
From: [delete] (Div13) (FBI)
Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2004 8:50 AM
To: [delete] 9Div13) (FBI) [delete] (Div13) (FBI) [delete] Delete]
(Div13) (FBI); [delete] (Div13) (FBI) [delete] (Div 13) (FBI); [delete]
(Div13) (FBI) [delete] (Div09) (FBI); [delete] (IR) (FBI)
Subject: RE: Detainee abuse claims
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED
NON-RECORD
ALCON,
Based on Rumsfeld's public statements,
DoD is against hooding prisoners, threats of violence and techniques
meant to humiliating detainees (there is a
list of these I have seen) [delete]. An EC outlining these
[delete] was done by MLDU in November 2003 as to FBI's disapproval
[delete] [delete] regardless of whether they were approved by the Deputy
Secretary Defense. DAD Harrington has also been interested in
following up on this. [Delete] where does that stand?
SSA [delete]
CTD/ORS/MLDU
JEH, Room 5382
[Delete]
---Original Message---
From: [delete] (Div13) (FBI)
Sent: Wednesday May 05, 2004 8:23 AM
To: [delete] (Div13) (FBI) [delete] (Div13) (FBI); [delete]
(Div13) (FBI); [delete] (Div13) (FBI)
Cc: [delete] (Div13) (FBI); [delete] (Div09) (FBI); [delete]
[delete] (IR) (FBI)
Subject: RE: Detainee abuse claims
Importance: High
We need to be very careful here.
Everyone should pay particular attention to the distinctions between
allegations of abuse and the use of techniques which fall outside of
FBI/DOJ training and policy. As I stated in my email yesterday, I
am not aware of any credible allegations of abuse by anyone in GTMO.
[Delete]
Our Behavioral Assessment Unit (BAU)
disagreed with the use of specific techniques in the case of [delete] as
they opined that the techniques would not be successful and they could
produce unreliable results. BAU did not make any allegations of
abuse that I am aware of.
---Original Message---
From: [delete] (Div13) (FBI)
Sent: Tue 5/4/2004 7:46 PM
To: [delete] (Div13) (FBI); [delete] (Div13) (FBI); [delete]
[delete] (Div13) (FBI)
Cc:
Subject: Detainee abuse claims
SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED
NON-RECORD
I can think of two specific examples ...
you may want to talk to BAU about [delete] and [delete] [delete] in GTMO.
DETAINEES-2715
DETAINEES-2716
SECRET
To: Counterterrorism From
Counterterrorism
Re: 315N-HQ-C1409646-E 02/28/2004
[Big delete]
[Big delete]
[Delete] was then asked if he had heard
of UBL, KSM, [delete] Al Qaeda, [delete] appeared uncomfortable with
this line of questioning and continued to deny any knowledge of the
above. When reminded that he had been shown a video of the
09/11/2001 terror attacks that explained the relevance of UBL, KSM and
Al Qaeda, [delete] said he had first heard of these matters from his
interrogators. When reminded that writer had posed this exact
question to him just one week prior, [delete] appeared confused and
stated he was losing his mind while in custody. [delete] went on
to state that all he can think of is his family and returning home to
them. [delete] then stated if the writer went to his village of
[delete] the writer would be moved to tears by the desperate situation
there. When told it was difficult to believe no one ever discussed
UBL whether in his home village or while in custody at Bagram, [delete]
stated no one is allowed to speak inside the BCP and therefor none of
his fellow PUC's discuss terrorism or terrorist activities.
[Delete] [Delete]
[Delete]
[Big Delete]
DETAINEES-1989
SECRET
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Date: 04/09/2004
Precedence: ROUTINE
To: Counterterrorism
Attn: ITOS1, UC [delete
TRRS, IOS [delete]
ITOS2, UC [delete]
ITOS2, IOS [delete]
ITOS2, UC [delete]
ITOS2, Iran Unit
From: Counterterrorism
ORS/MLDU/Bagram, Afghanistan
Contact: TDY-SA [delete]
Approved By: [delete]
Drafted By: [delete]
Title: GTMO TASK FORCE
BAGRAM AFGHANISTAN
Synopsis: Provide
results of interviews conducted [delete] and [delete] with Person Under
Control (PUC) [delete] writer conducted the interviews with the
assistance of US Army Major [delete] and [delete] [delete] Linguist
[delete].
Administrative: As a result of
meetings conducted by Bagram SSA [delete] with representatives of the
Department of Defense [delete] the FBI is now permitted to release the
following information to the USIC
Details: [Big delete]
[Big delete]
[Delete] [Delete] When asked what
[delete] he himself understood [delete] stated that even though he can
conduct basic conversations in [delete] he is unable to read it.
When asked why he spends so much time with [delete] Koran in his cell,
[delete] responded that he essentially is just looking at the words but
is unable to comprehend them. [Delete] said he was not familiar
himself with the content of the Koran other than what he had been told
by others. Additionally, [delete] did not know the Koran has been
published in [delete] English and several other languages. When
asked if he would like to receive a copy of the Koran in [delete]
[delete] became excited at the possibility.
Note: Writer believes [delete]
would be an excellent candidate for an ideological/theological approach
by an Islamic scholar that speaks [delete]. He appears to be a
genuinely religious individual that is easily influenced by persons that
hold positions of authority within Islam.
The subject then provided the following
information regarding the day he was captured by coalition forces
[delete] [big delete]
[Delete] [Delete]
[Big delete]
[Big delete] He was later awakened
by the sound of explosions and gunfire. [delete] said he put his
hands in the air, but was struck in the head and passed out. He
later regained consciousness in a hospital.
Two or three days later, [delete] was
spoken to by two men, one that appeared to be an American and another
that was of Arab descent. When questioned by the two, [delete]
said he provided truthful answers to the questions that he understood.
[Big delete]
[Big delete]
[Big delete]
[Big delete]
When questioned, [delete] said he was
familiar with Mir Amal Kansi, a Pakistani that was convicted for
murdering two CIA employees outside of CIA headquarters. [Delete]
said he did not know him personally, but was aqware of his case because
it had garnered so much media attention. [Delete] said he was not
familiar with Ramzi Yousef. [Delete] [Delete]
When asked what he would like more than
anything, [delete] said he wanted to know what his punishment was going
to be. When asked why he picked that over seeing his family or
going home, [delete] said he knows he is going to be in American custody
for a long time and that he will eventually be turned over to the
[delete] authorities when the US is done with him. When asked why
the [delete] would want him, [delete] replied that it is because he is a
[delete] citizen and has a case pending against him in [delete] went on
to explain that he has a [delete] [delete] case pending [delete]
[Big delete]
DETAINEES-1991
DETAINEES-1992
DETAINEES-1993
SECRET/NOFORN
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
Date: 05/02/2004
Precedence: ROUTINE
To: Counterterrorism
Attn: ITOS1, CONUS1, SSA [Delete]
ITOS1, CONUS1, IOS [Delete]
TRRS, IOS [delete]
TRRS, IOS [delete]
Legat
SA [delete]
Det [delete]
From: Counterterrorism
ORS/MLDU/TDY Bagram, Afghanistan
Contact: TDY-SSA
Approved By: [delete]
Drafted By: [delete]
Case ID # 315N-NY-285984
315N-HQ-C1406946-E
Title: [delete]
IT-OTHER
GTMO TASK FORCE;
FBIHQ-AFGHANISTAN
Synopsis: Documentation of [delete]
interviews of [delete] at Bagram Air Field (BAF), Afghanistan.
Details: On [delete] Supervisory
Special Agent (SSA) [delete] and Sgt. [delete] USA, Military
Intelligence (MI), interviewed [delete] [delete] hereafter referred to
as [delete].
On [delete] [delete] was asked whether he
had thought about Interviewing Agents comments regarding a need to be
truthful and candid in all aspects of interviews. [Delete] stated
that he had been completely candid and that he could do no more.
Interviewing Agents bluntly told [delete] that he had not been truthful
and his continued lack of candor was the reason he remained where he
was. [Delete] steadfastly insisted that there was nothing he
has hidden from investigators the entire time he has been in custody.
Interviewing Agents spent some time
reminding [delete] of his transparent and frequent contact with [delete]
[delete]. Furthermore, Interviewing Agents logically laid out the
facts of his associations with Usama Bin Laden (UBL) and how that led to
interaction with [delete]. Interviewing Agents also interjected
with comments made by [delete] which showed [delete] overall complicity.
After a lengthy time, [delete] finally
admitted that he knew all along that when he was dealing with [delete]
[delete] that they were associated with Al Qaeda (AQ). However,
[delete] continued to deny that he knew [delete] was associated with AQ.
The interview was concluded.
By design, the mood throughout the
[delete] interview was hostile. Interviewing Agents refused to
allow [delete] to misdirect or deny known facts. Interviewing
Agents also maintained an aggressive attitude toward [delete] throughout
the course of the interview. Furthermore, Interviewing Agents
advised [delete] they felt his simple denials were childlike and that it
was shameful [delete] [delete]. Interviewing Agents believe that
[delete] is egotistical and enjoys playing the role of mentor.
With [delete] being told that Interviewers saw him so negatively, future
statement by [delete] might be influenced so he could avoid this
negative perception. Interviewing Agents believe [delete] feels
that to state he knew [delete] was AQ would be tantamount to signing a
confession. However, even if [delete] never provides truthful
statements on the topic of [delete] his fear of being viewed as an
intellectual or ethical inferior may drive him to be more careful about
making untruthful statements in other areas.
[Delete] was reinterviewed.
Interviewing Agents wanted to see how Paracha's
attitude had changed after the hostile nature
of the last interview. [Delete] was greeted and asked how he had
been feeling. [Delete] stated that he had been experiencing
dizzy spells and shortness of breath. Interviewing Agents pent
a few minutes discussing further [delete] health.
[Delete] was then asked to talk about his
attitude toward the Taliban. [Delete] stated that throughout
history Pakistan and Afghanistan were so closely linked that they could
not be separated. [Delete] advised that the Taliban was the only
group that has been able to bring stability to Afghanistan.
[Delete] believed that the Taliban maintained law and order and
successfully controlled the drug trade within Afghanistan.
[Delete] stated that Islam is a flexible
religion and the Taliban's only problem was that it was not flexible.
[Delete] explained that Afghanistan was not an educated society so the
only means to properly control the population was through religion which
the Taliban did do successfully.
[Delete] then broadened the topic and
discussed Islam in relation to other religions of the Book (Christianity
and Judaism). [Delete] stated that Islam forces no person to
change his religion and that actually Muslims have a responsibility to
protect non-Muslims.
[Delete] was asked to discuss his views
on personal jihad versus group jihad. [Delete] stated that his
view of a personal jihad was for one to maintain self control and
contribute what one can to society. Group jihad was in the defense
of the Islamic State. In a sovereign state with an army there is
no need for group jihad by the civilians. Furthermore, [delete]
stated taht group jihad is authorized against the government which poses
the threat but not against the innocent or civilians. Jihad in
defense can be in the form of physical power (action), tongue (verbal),
or simply condemnation within one's heart.
[Delete] was then asked that based on his
believe in the Islamic State ruling peacefully with persons of other
religions and the belief of group jihad only in defense against an
attacking government, what did he think of actions carried out by UBL
and AQ. [Delete] stated that UBL had no authority under Islamic
Law to proclaim jihad. Interviewing Agents continued and advised
that though UBL did not have such authority he was in league with others
that did have the authority and supported UBL's jihad proclamation.
Interviewing Agents asked [delete] if he wished to see Christians
hating Muslim's because of the violent actions of a few [delete]
reiterated that he wished Muslim and non-Muslim could live peacefully.
[Delete] was told that if this were truly his wish he could not
logically support UBL or AQ. [Delete] remained quiet during
much of this discourse but finally agreed that what UBL did was harmful
to the Islamic cause.
At his point the interview was
concluded. Interviewing Agents did not notice any harmful effects
as a result of the adversarial nature of the previous interview.
[Delete] spoke freely to Interviewing Agents and did not mention the
previous interview. [Delete] has been in
isolation for several months and it is apparent [delete] needs and
enjoys the interaction these interviews bring. Interviewing
Agents feel [delete] can be pushed fairly far and it will not cause him
to cease speaking with Interviewing Agents.
In general, Interviewing Agents believe
[delete] relies on the fact that Interviewers do not have the knowledge
to refute many statements he makes. [Delete] is free to make
comments on various topics in an authoritative manner and has thus far
not been challenged on his interpretation of the facts. When
[delete] is challenged on the statements he makes and those challenges
are backed with other evidence, [delete] loses the control he feels
during the interview. Interviewing Agents believe asking [delete]
questions in which the Interviewers have solid evidence to refute any
possible lies and constantly challenging [delete] is the best approach
to use at this stage with him.
LEAD(s)
Set Lead 1:
DETAINEES-2000
SECRET/ORCON/NOFORN
To: Counterterrorism
From Counterterrorism
Re: 315N-HQ-1406946-E
07/28/2004
[Big Delete] [Delete] stated that they
were taught to fight the "infidels" and to spread the word of Islam.
Everyone in the training camp was prepared to kill "infidels" if they
did not accept the word of Islam.
[Big delete]
[Big delete] It was at this time
that [delete] related stories from his time spent in the Cuban prison
(presumably GTMO). [Delete] told [delete] that they were denied
sleep, they were only given certain types of food and they were beaten.
[Delete] claimed to had been released in a "trade" for Coalition
prisoners.
[Big Delete]
DETAINEES-2006
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
SHAFIQ RASUL, et al.,
Petitioners.
DAVID M. HICKS,
Petitioner,
-against-
GEORGE W. BUSH, et al.,
Respondents.
______________________________________x
Civil Action No. 02-299 (CKK)
SUBMITTED UNDER SEAL
AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF AMENDED COMPLAINT
AND APPLICATIONS FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF
DAVID M. HICKS, being duly sworn, deposes
and says:
I. I am David M. Hicks, a Petitioner in
the above-captioned action, and I make this Affidavit, submitted under
seal, [1] in support of my Amended Complaint, and my applications for
injunctive relief.
2. I am a native and citizen of
Australia, born in Adelaide August 7, 1975. I have completed the 9th
Grade in the Australian school system.
3. This Affidavit provides an outline of
the abuse and mistreatment I have received, witnessed, and/or heard
about since I have been detained by the United States in Afghanistan,
aboard U.S. Naval vessels and U.S. military aircraft, and at the U.S.
Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba (hereinafter "Guantanamo Bay''). I
have been detained by the United States Armed Forces from December 2001
until present. I arrived in Guantanamo Bay in January 2002. It does not
detail all of the abuse I have received, or witnessed, or heard about,
but merely sketches some of it. I have been careful to specify what
happened to me, what I saw happen to others, and what I have heard
about. During the course of my interrogations, I have repeatedly asked
for a lawyer and why I am not being treated as a Prisoner of War.
4. Since I do not have access to either a
typewriter or computer, this Affidavit has been prepared by my attorneys
based on information I have provided to them. I have reviewed the
Affidavit carefully, and verify that it is completely accurate.
5. I have been beaten before, after, and
during interrogations.
6. I have been menaced and threatened,
directly and indirectly, with firearms and other weapons before and
during interrogations.
7. I have heard beatings of other
detainees occurring during interrogation, and observed detainees'
injuries that were received during interrogations.
8. I have been beaten while blindfolded
and handcuffed.
9. I have been in the company of other
detainees who were beaten while blindfolded and handcuffed. At one
point, a group of detainees, including myself, were subjected to being
randomly hit over a eight hour session while handcuffed and blindfolded.
10. I have been struck with hands, fists,
and other objects (including rifle butts). I have also been kicked. I
have been hit in the face, head, feet, and torso.
11. I have had my head rammed into
asphalt several times (while blindfolded).
12. I have had handcuffs placed on me so
tightly, and for so long (as much as 14-15 hours) that my hands were
numb for a considerable period thereafter.
13. I have had medication - the identity
of which was unknown to me, despite my requests for information - forced
upon me against my will. I have been struck while under the influence of
sedatives that were forced upon me by injection.
14. I have been forced to run in leg
shackles that regularly ripped the skin off my ankles. Many other
detainees experienced the same.
15. I have been deprived of sleep as a
matter of policy.
16. I have witnessed the activities of
the Internal Reaction Force (hereinafter "IRF'), which consists of a
squad of soldiers that enter a detainee's cell and brutalize him with
the aid of an attack dog. The IRF invasions were so common that the term
to be "IRF'ed" became part of the language of the detainees. I have seen
detainees suffer serious injuries as a result of being IRF'ed. I have
seen detainees IRF'ed while they were praying, or for refusing
medication.
17. I was told repeatedly that if I
cooperated during the course of interrogations, I would be sent home to
Australia after the interrogations were concluded. I was told there was
an "easy way" and a "hard way" to respond to interrogation.
18. Interrogators once offered me the
services of a prostitute for fifteen minutes if I would spy on other
detainees. I refused.
19. Failure to cooperate meant the loss
of the ordinary necessities of living, such as showers, sufficient food,
relief from the prospect of IRF'ing and other regular abuse visited upon
non-cooperative detainees, access to reading material, and social
contact (including receiving mail).
20. During Ramadan, food was withheld
from detainees after the break of the daily fast in order to coerce
cooperation with interrogators. Detainees who refused to cooperate were
punished regularly, and denied the ordinary necessities of living.
21. I have been told that strobe lights
and extreme cold were also used to disorient detainees in order to
soften them up for interrogation. I have also heard that religious
detainees were exposed to pornography, and were dragged around naked in
order to break their will.
22. Detainees were not allowed to know
the date, day, year, or time. We were deprived of any and all
information and news from the world. Detainees were permitted very
little exercise.
23. At one point during 2003 alone, my
weight dropped by 30 pounds (and I was not overweight to start).
24. Other detainees also informed me that
interrogators attempted to turn them against me by spreading rumors
about me. In any event, due to the way interrogations were conducted,
and the physical layout of the camps, it was obvious to all of the
detainees who was being interrogated, for how long, and whether that
detainee emerged abused or not (with the latter signifying cooperation).
Thus, any detainee would know who was cooperating with the
interrogators.
25. The interrogation process ruled
the detention camps and the lives of detainees. Cooperation with
interrogators offered the only means of relief from the miserable
treatment and abuse the detainees suffered. Those who failed to comply
suffered abuse until they gave in.
26. My conditions changed after I was
moved to Camp Echo (as did the treatment afforded me by the military
personnel on duty there) July 9, 2003, and then again after the visits
from my attorneys began. However, at Camp Echo, I have been held in a
solitary cell and have been so since arriving at Camp Echo. I was not
allowed outside of my cell in Camp Echo for exercise in the sunlight,
from July 2003 until March 10, 2004.
27. As noted earlier, the above catalogue
of abuse and mistreatment is not complete. It is but a summary of some
of the abuse I suffered, witnessed, and/or heard about since my
detention began. I would be able to provide further information and
detail if the Court so desires, but a complete account would require a
substantially longer document. In fact, at my request and due to the
persistence of my lawyers, I have recently met with U.S. military
investigators conducting the probe into detainee abuse in Afghanistan.
Also, this is not the first time I protested my mistreatment, since on
several occasions - in Afghanistan, and later at Guantanamo Bay - I
informed representatives of the International Red Cross of the abuse.
WHEREFORE, it is respectfully requested
that the Court grant the relief sought in my Amended Complaint, and for
any such other relief that the Court deems proper.
DAVID M. HICKS
Sworn to before me this 5th day of
August, 2004
M.D. MORI
Major
United States Marine Corps
Judge Advocate
_______________
1. This Affidavit is submitted under seal
due to restrictions on information dissemination placed by U.S. military
authorities on my attorneys and me. I have no objection to the unsealing
of this Affidavit the Court determines it is appropriate to do so.
Go to Next Page
|