Report Details Military Tactics FBI Agents Found Abusive
WASHINGTON - FBI agents repeatedly complained that harsh interrogation techniques used on detainees in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo might violate the law and jeopardize future criminal trials, but administration officials did little to address the concerns, a government watchdog concluded in a report released Tuesday.
At one point in 2003, several top Justice Department officials took the concerns about interrogation practices used by the military at Guantanamo to the National Security Council, Justice Department Inspector General Glenn Fine said in his report. However, Fine said the complaints did not appear to trigger any response from the National Security Council, which includes President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney and was chaired at the time by then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice.
Although the FBI's concerns about harsh interrogation techniques were previously known, Fine's report provides the most detailed narrative yet of how top law enforcement and military officials were slow to respond to the agents' complaints and how, in some instances, administration officials appear to have disregarded them.
Several witnesses told Fine's investigators then-Attorney General John Ashcroft also brought the matter to the attention of the National Security Council or the Pentagon, but Fine couldn't verify the accounts because Ashcroft refused to be interviewed.
The 370-page report took four years to complete, with its release delayed by the Pentagon's attempt to keep a larger portion of the report classified, according to Fine. His investigators interviewed more than 230 witnesses and surveyed 1,000 FBI agents.
The report describes how agents beginning in 2002 became deeply troubled by some of the interrogations they witnessed and details frequent clashes between agents and their military counterparts over the military's and CIA's use of harsh techniques that one agent described as "borderline torture."
In late 2002, the military adopted broad interrogation policies that clashed with those permitted by the FBI. Among the permitted techniques were hooding, putting prisoners in stress positions for as long as four hours, 20-hour interrogations and removal of clothing.
While FBI agents took part in interrogations in a few isolated cases "that would not normally be permitted in the United States," Fine said the situations "in no way resembled" the treatment of detainees at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, where graphic photos later exposed abuses. A vast majority of the FBI agents followed FBI policies and did not participate when other agencies used techniques that violated the bureau's policies, Fine said.
"In sum, we believe that while the FBI could have provided clearer guidance earlier, and while the FBI could have pressed harder for resolution of concerns about detainee treatment by other agencies, the FBI should be credited for its conduct and professionalism in detainee interrogations," said Fine, who has no jurisdiction over the CIA or the Pentagon.
Tuesday, Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman said the Pentagon found no evidence that interrogators tortured detainees during a 2005 review of techniques used at Guantanamo. Whitman also said he did not know of any Pentagon efforts that had delayed the inspector general's report.
In a brief statement, Justice Department spokesman Brian Roehrkasse said the department was "pleased" that the report "credited the FBI for its conduct and professionalism during interrogations."
Justice and Pentagon officials, however, did not address the questions raised by the report's description of interrogation techniques that disturbed FBI agents. Agents at Guantanamo, for example, witnessed and complained about the use of sleep deprivation, prolonged short-shackling, in which a detainee's hands were shackled close to his feet, and the holding of detainees in rooms at extremely cold or hot temperatures.
At times, agents witnessed detainees' thumbs twisted, female interrogators touching detainees sexually and the wrapping of detainees' heads in duct tape.
In 2002, FBI agents objected to the treatment of top al Qaida member Abu Zubaydah, whom they first questioned but later handed over to the CIA. The CIA has since acknowledged waterboarding him, but Fine said FBI agents did not appear to have witnessed waterboarding, which simulates drowning by pouring water over a restrained detainee's face.
Tensions between agents and interrogators heightened between 2002 and 2003 during the military's interrogation of Mohammed al Qahtani, the alleged 20th hijacker who was prevented from participating in the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, Fine said.
After his capture, al Qahtani resisted FBI attempts to interview him and the military took over his questioning. FBI agents complained interrogators relied on questionable techniques, including keeping him awake during 20-hour intervals and threatening him with a dog.
"The informal response that some of these agents received from FBI Headquarters was that agents could continue to witness (military) interrogations ... so long as they did not participate," Fine said.
"No formal responses were ever received by the agents."
Although agents witnessed interrogation techniques that appeared to violate their own policies, the FBI was slow to clarify the bureau's stance on the methods, Fine said.
In 2002, the FBI decided it would not participate in joint interrogations with other agencies when techniques violated the bureau's policies. However, the FBI did not formalize the guidance until May 2004, after abuse surfaced at Abu Ghraib.
Meanwhile, agents continued to remain concerned about whether they could be criminally liable for merely witnessing the interrogations and questioned whether the interrogations jeopardized future trials, Fine said.
Their concerns appear to be justified. This month, military officials dropped charges against al Qahtani, citing concerns about questionable information obtained during the interrogations.
"We believe that the FBI should have recognized earlier the issues raised by the FBI's participating with the military in detainee interrogations ... and should have moved more quickly to provide clearer guidance to its agents on these issues," Fine said.
Officials with the CIA and the Pentagon have said they later revised their rules to limit interrogation methods, including banning the use of waterboarding, which the CIA has acknowledged was used on three high-level terrorism suspects.
The Pentagon and CIA knew of the FBI's ongoing concerns, but did not appear to have weighed them when coming up with their own interrogation policies, Fine said.
McClatchy Washington correspondent Nancy Youssef contributed.
© McClatchy Newspapers 2008
Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
6 Comments so far
Show All"This month, military officials dropped charges against al Qahtani, citing concerns about questionable information obtained during the interrogations.The FBI distancing themselves from military procedures is a huge red flag. I'd written in my blog that "clean" FBI teams had had better success than the ones who witnessed or deployed torture using Starbucks and congenial conversation. Anyone who's followed the Guantanamo trials also knows that there are fears that attorneys will be disobeying their superior officers--judges--who may or may not choose to disqualify confessions based on torture. Military lawyers representing Gitmo detainees threatened to quit rather than violate legal procedure. Allowing the tortured confessions to stand as evidence could deny defendants their right to representation and full defense under the law. Strict adherence to the Uniform Code of Military Justice, like the US law which FBI agents operate under regardless of locale, would throw out all the coerced testimony.
I agree with itsaNaziWorldOrder (May 21st, 2008 12:40 pm) that COINTELPRO was wrong, but disagree with the general direction of that writer's comments.
Here's the rub:
Progressives complain that Bush sees the world in binary terms, black and white, good and evil, us vs. them. Our better angels know the world and human nature is far more complex.
There are people in the military (like Fallon and Zinni), in the FBI (like Coleen Rowley, 9-11 whistleblower), and in the CIA (sometimes, like Ray McGovern), who know that things are not black-and-white: They know that it's wrong to characterize the US and these institutions as the good guys, and others as the bad guys. they also know that it's untrue to characterize them as pure evil, and the skeptical critics as the good guys.
We should recognize that there are moments when some of these institutions seem to have internal battles: When the FBI releases a report on its criticism of interrogation and torture, or when the National Intelligence Estimate releases information claiming that Iran suspended its nuclear arms program, it's not helpful to respond by saying that we can't ever trust these institutions.
Yes, they once led COINTELPRO, and coups in the name of "our national interests," and planned operation Northwoods, and did all manner of other things that many of us deplore. But don't judge every action of the institution in the same black-and-white terms that we deplore when Bush uses them.
I say this as a teacher who has had students who have come from families with a lot of love, respect, and high standards for contributing to the common good of family and community. Because of their good values, they sometimes join the military out of a willingness to serve.
At worst, some of our institutions sometimes take people like this and twist them into morally repugnant players in projects that use them for highly questionable goals.
At best, the individuals perceive much of what is going on around them, and in their own ways, they become forces for good, or at least moderation. At times, it may be people like this -- like Fallon or Rowley -- who are more necessary than we think, and who hold us back from the brink of much darker things.
If habeas corpus no longer applies, then what difference does it make to jeopardize future trials? Apparently, these FBI agents were afraid that their executive branch cronies would leave them hung out to dry if the shit ever hit the fan. I doubt the U.S. government will ever let these guys go free, or, when they let Mumia Abu-Jamal go and Leonard Peltier, then they'll consider letting the Guantanamo detainees go, but only if they're quivering masses of PTSD zombies without the capacity to swat a fly.
"Buried in a Department of Justice report released Tuesday are new allegations about a 2002 arrangement between the United States and China, which allowed Chinese intelligence to visit Guantanamo and interrogate Chinese Uighurs"
Dinner, dancing and a tryst in the torture chambers? Love those ChristoRepublican values. Now our Sadist-in-Chief says He can't send these boy toys home ... for fear of being ... tortured.
Certainly a bizarre characterization of the FBI considering the FBI's COINTELPRO program and their intense and well-organized efforts to prune activists, progressives and others from society even to the point of committing assassinations.
What's COINTELPRO?
http://www.albionmonitor.com/9905a/jbcointelpro.html
Numerous Argentine and Chilean and Serbian torturers and killers have been brought to fair trials and sentenced....this is not a business-as-usual century we are living in. The FBI has people who must read the international press, enormously more truthful and varied than anything left in this benighted ex-republic, and see the writing on the wall: the illegalities perpetrated IN OUR NAME by our government both in the so-called "Hommelund" and across the globe in dozens of secret prisons (approximately 27,000 prisoners and more every day...) are going to mean PRISON TIME FOR U.S. AUTHORITIES.....no time soon, but just be patient. The finger pointing has only just begun. Woe is U.S.