Gitmo interrogator describes tactics
| 2/16/2008, 12:51 p.m. PT By ANDREW O. SELSKY The Associated Press | |  |
GUANTANAMO BAY NAVAL BASE, Cuba (AP) — Interrogators got intelligence from detainees that helped U.S. troops in Afghanistan attack Taliban fighters last summer — and they did it through casual questioning and not torture, the military's chief interrogator here said.
In a rare interview with The Associated Press, veteran interrogator Paul Rester complained that his profession has gotten a bad reputation due to accounts of waterboarding and other rough interrogation tactics used by the CIA at "black sites."
Lawyers for Guantanamo detainees, however, allege their clients have been subjected to temperature extremes, sleep deprivation and threats at this U.S. military base in southeast Cuba.
Wearing a blue-striped business shirt without a tie and looking more like a harried executive than a top interrogator, Rester groused that his line of work is "a business that is fundamentally thankless."
He sat hunched over a table in a snack room inside the building where the top commanders keep their offices. In an attempt to keep personnel from blabbing about intelligence-gathering, a poster showed a picture of a hooded gunman and the words: "Keep talking. We're listening" — today's version of the World War II-era admonishment that "Loose lips sink ships."
"Everybody in the world believes that they know how we do what we do, and I have to endure it every time I turn around and somebody is making reference to waterboarding," Rester said. He insisted that Guantanamo interrogators have had many successes using rapport-building and said that technique was the norm here.
For security reasons, he would only discuss one of the successes, and that was only because his boss, Rear Adm. Mark Buzby, already had described it in a speech last month. Buzby said several detainees, using poster board paper and crayons, drew detailed maps of the Tora Bora area in eastern Afghanistan that enabled coalition forces to wipe out safe houses, trenches and supplies last summer as Taliban forces were returning to the stronghold they had abandoned more than five years ago.
Buzby, in a separate interview with the AP, said a U.S. commander in Afghanistan had requested the information on a Friday and it was obtained and sent to Afghanistan by the end of the weekend.
Rester indicated the interrogators casually asked the detainees about their knowledge of Tora Bora, not letting on that it was tactically important for a pending military strike.
"And it may in fact, since it was five years old, have seemed totally innocuous to the persons we were talking to," Rester said.
Buzby, the top commander of detention operations at Guantanamo, said the intelligence "had a very positive effect ... for us and a very negative effect on the enemy operating in that area." He declined to be more specific.
In the interview, Rester said only two detainees were given rougher treatment in Guantanamo, and that was during the earlier days: Mohammed al-Qahtani, the alleged 20th hijacker who was turned away from the United States by immigration officials just before the Sept. 11 attacks, and an unidentified man Rester said recruited lead hijacker Mohamed Atta.
"Most of the stories (of detainee abuse) that have propagated all stem from those two," said Rester, who began his career in the Vietnam War. "The constant attention on that takes away from the fact that the productive, consistent direct approach ... has enabled us to possess the vast body of knowledge that we actually have."
Al-Qahtani told a military panel at Guantanamo that he was beaten, restrained for long periods in uncomfortable positions, threatened with dogs, exposed to loud music and freezing temperatures and stripped nude in front of female personnel at Guantanamo. He said he admitted meeting Osama bin Laden and agreeing to participate in a "martyr mission" for al-Qaida only because he was tortured, and told the panel that he was innocent.
A 2005 military investigation concluded that al-Qahtani had been subjected to harsh treatment approved by then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld because he would not crack under interrogation. He is one of six Guantanamo detainees who were charged Monday in connection with the Sept. 11 attacks. The Pentagon said it was seeking the death penalty for all six.
Under the Military Commissions Act, statements obtained through torture are not admissible. But some statements obtained through "coercion" may be admitted at the discretion of a military judge.
Joshua Colangelo-Bryan, a lawyer who represents several detainees, scoffed at Rester's contention that rough treatment at Guantanamo was restricted to just two men.
"There are so many accounts by FBI agents ... and others who personally saw non-rapport-building techniques that Rester's statement is just not credible," he said.
The 2005 military investigation stemmed from FBI agents' allegations that detainees were being mistreated, and determined that interrogators used unauthorized techniques when two detainees were short-shackled to an eyebolt on a floor, when duct tape was used to "quiet" a detainee and when interrogators threatened the family of a detainee.
"It distracts from the efforts of every other individual who has been in contact with (military) intelligence," Rester said. "Nothing is a substitute for really knowing the subject matter, having the knowledge of the language and culture and being able to sit down with someone and speak as grown-ups."
Copyright 2008 Associated Press. All rights reserved.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
On January 18, 2006, I had the privilege of speaking with Joshua Colangelo Bryan, an attorney with the New York office of the law firm of Dorsey and Whitney, and counsel to three currently detained inmates of the American detention facility at Camp Delta, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, Juma Al Dossari, Salah Abdul Rasool Al Blooshi and Essa Al Murbati, all nationals of Bahrain. Three of Mr. Colangelo Bryan's clients have previously been released from American custody at Guantanamo Bay. The remaining three are in less than ideal condition; Al-Dossari attempted suicide during a meeting with Mr. Colangelo-Bryan (as alluded to in my interview with Baher Azmy) and Al Murbati is involved in the hunger strike by a number of detainees. The following are my interview notes as reviewed and, as necessary, corrected by Mr. Colangelo Bryan.
The Talking Dog: As is my custom, I start with this question. Where were you on September 11, 2001?
Joshua Colangelo Bryan: I was in Gracanica, Kosovo, working for the United Nations Mission to Kosovo. I learned of the events of September 11th later in the day, at the office in Pristina, where other people pointed it out, and I saw it on television, probably on CNN.
The Talking Dog: Are you from the New York area?
Joshua Colangelo Bryan: Born and raised in Manhattan... the events of 9-11 were very personal to me.
The Talking Dog: Do you know where your clients were, and to the extent not classified or privileged, can you tell me?
Joshua Colangelo Bryan: A couple of my clients were in Bahrain. A couple were in the Pakistan/Afghanistan border area, working with refugees there from the Afghan civil war; they had been there a couple of months as of September 11th.
The Talking Dog: How did you-- and your law firm-- come to represent the Bahrainian detainees specifically?
Joshua Colangelo Bryan: After the Rasul case, the Center for Constitutional Rights asked Dorsey & Whitney if it would take on a case for the Guantanamo Bay detainees. At that time, a number of the families of detainees were seeking representation. One of those groups was from Bahrain. I personally had a couple of years working with and applying international human rights law and international criminal law in the Balkans, which was useful experience.
The Talking Dog: I recently read of an effort spearheaded by you to obtain representation for previously unrepresented Bahraini (and perhaps other) detainees before enactment of the Graham-Levin-Kyl Amendment. Were those efforts successful? Do you know, as of the time the President signed the bill into law, how many detainees did not have active cases, and would, under Senator Levin's reckoning at least, be completely without a habeas corpus remedy?
Joshua Colangelo Bryan: There are no unrepresented Bahrainians [at Guantanamo]. There were six Bahraini detainees at Guantanamo Bay, three of whom have been transferred home to Bahrain. Before Graham Levin passed, the Center for Constitutional Rights brought an action on behalf of all unidentified detainees for whom no action was pending, so all detainees now have a pending action.
The Talking Dog: I've read a number of accounts of your client Juma Al-Dossari making a suicide attempt during a conference he had with you; in brief, if you could tell me how it has effected later meetings you have had with Mr. Al-Dossari (extra precautions, for example, or anything else that comes to mind)?
Joshua Colangelo Bryan: I met with Juma three weeks after the suicide attempt. The meeting was in the naval hospital at Guantanamo. The military did not want to bring him to Camp Echo [where attorney client meetings are held] after the prior incident.
The Talking Dog: I've recently read that Mr. Al-Dossari tried to tear open a wound in his right arm (which, for whatever reason, the Government has decided is not a suicide attempt) and transferred to the Naval Hospital at Guantanamo Bay. You had filed court papers with Judge Reggie Walton, and I understand Judge Walton ordered the Government to produce an Affidavit as to the conditions of Mr. Al-Dossari's confinement. Did the Government submit it, have you seen it, and has anything changed? Can you tell me what the difference is between Delta Camp One, Delta Camp Five, and just how many separate "camps" there are within the X-Ray, Delta and other apparatus there, and what you understand the differences are? What is the condition (as far as you know) of your other clients still held? Are your clients participating in the hunger strike?
Joshua Colangelo Bryan: Yes, I later learned that Juma tried to open the wound in his right open. The Government has characterized it as a suicide attempt. I have not met him since that event. The Government did send me a letter advising of this, but otherwise, the government provides no information whatsoever as to the condition of detainees. In this case, they sent a two sentence letter stating that Juma reopened the wound. The Government was ordered to produce an affidavit with the details of Juma’s conditions of confinement by Judge Walton. They have produced an affidavit, but at its essence it is hopelessly vague, without solid representations as to the extent, for example, of the isolation or solitary confinement at Camp One, which we believe is certainly a contributing factor to Juma’s deteriorating condition. As to the “layout” of detention facilities at Guantanamo Bay, Camp Delta consists of Camps 1,2,3 and 4, Camp 5 is an entirely separate prison, and Camp 6 is a “long term” facility still under construction. Camp 4 is the most “liberal” facility, where there are, for example, more exercise privileges allowed, for prisoners who are perceived as lower security risks. I’m not aware of any distinctions between Camps 1 through 3. Camp 5 is a maximum security facility with individual cells where the prisoners can’t see out; this is where Al-Dossari had been held for over 1 ½ years. One of my clients– Al-Blooshi– is in Camp 4, as a “low security risk.” The allegations against him are weaker than against many prisoners who have been released. Al-Murbati is now in the detainee hospital, on a hunger strike. I did not meet him the last time I went to Guantanamo for, I was told, logistical reasons. Hopefully, I will see him the next time I go down.
The Talking Dog: I understand that at various times, the government releases some kind of letter or statement to you as the condition of Mr. Al-Dossari and your other clients; in discussions with your clients (again, to the extent not privileged or classified), is the government's descriptions accurate, or inaccurate, in the view of your client, and to the extent you have otherwise been able to confirm on your own?
Joshua Colangelo Bryan: No explanation is ever given by the Government; the 2-sentence letter on Juma opening his wound was a rare exception.
The Talking Dog: Am I correct that some of your clients have been released (at the behest and request of the Bahrainian government) but three (Juma Al Dossari, Salah Abdul Rasool Al Blooshi and Essa Al Murbati) are still detained at Guantanamo Bay?
Joshua Colangelo Bryan: Again, no explanation is ever given as to why prisoners are held, or prisoners are released. We have urged the Bahraini government to demand that its citizens be returned to Bahrain, and certainly we have been trying to generate publicity to encourage the Bahrainian government to do just that.
The Talking Dog: Judge Joyce Hens Green ruled around a year ago that the entire Guantanamo detention process was illegal, for among other reasons, violating the third Geneva Convention. Naturally, the government appealed that ruling. I understand that the Geneva Convention aspect was addressed by the D.C. Circuit in the Hamdan case, and the Supreme Court has, for the moment, accepted review in Hamdan. What is the status of remaining issues associated with the appeal of Judge Green's decision, and specifically, how it relates to your clients, and I take it this is all held up by Graham Levin?
Joshua Colangelo Bryan: An appeal is still pending in the D.C. Circuit. It has been fully argued and briefed for months. The Graham Levin issue has created another subject for further briefing. By its own terms, Graham Levin does not apply to these cases, which have been pending for years. Even if, as the Government argues, it did, it would be unconstitutional for violating the suspension clause. Likely, if the Hamdan case addresses the Graham Levin issues, they will have bearing on our case.
The Talking Dog: I understand that Mr. Al-Dossari recently released a detailed testimony of his abuse, both in custody in Afghanistan and later in Cuba, that you provided to Amnesty International. I take it that even this statement had to be vetted by the United States government (for secret codes, I suppose!) before you could release it, correct? I understand the same applies to your own notes; I understand that in one case at least, the government lost your notes in transit from Cuba to Virginia; was a suit filed or other action taken over that? Mr. Al-Dossari's testimonial is pretty graphic [including allegations of a number of beatings, application of electric shocks, starvation, sleep deprivation and other abuses]. Can you characterize any other abuse that you're aware of that he did not document?
Joshua Colangelo Bryan: I fought quite a bit to have that statement cleared, and ultimately, despite Government opposition, it was cleared in large measure. Some portions of some pages have been redacted as classified. Juma did not write this in front of me. It is a 20 page, single spaced handwritten document. He was allowed to keep it and give it to me. Interestingly, prisoners have been permitted to keep “attorney client” communication documents, though materials have been taken if shown to another prisoner on the theory that they are no longer privileged; so much for the joint defense privilege. The government did indeed lose my notes. What happened was some motion practice that appears to have somehow gotten lost between Judge Green and Judge Walton demanding that the Government reimburse us for the costs of another trip to Guantanamo– around $5,000– including transportation, translators and so forth– for what amounts to its own error. There is no resolution on that motion. As to additional details, Juma obviously didn’t discuss details we have learned from governmental personnel about the conditions of his confinement, as he doesn’t know what we have discovered in that manner.
The Talking Dog: I understand that the only evidence the government purports to have by way of "a charge" against Mr. Al-Dossari is that he was "present at Tora Bora". Has the government ever expanded or provided more detail for its statement of charges-- whether in classified form or public form? Are you aware of any further charges against him? I understand that there were reports out of the Buffalo Evening News a number of years ago that Mr. Al-Dossari was a reputed Al Qaeda recruiter who may have approached the defendants in the "Lackawanna Six" case. Has the government made any reference to that as far as a basis to detain Mr. Al-Dossari? Has any effort been made to obtain evidence from Mr. Al-Dossari with respect to that Lackawanna Six case, or any other legal action?
Joshua Colangelo Bryan: The Combatant Status Review Tribunal (CSRT) expressly found that there was no evidence to support this Lackawanna Six connection, and it was expressly not a basis for his continued detention. An interview with at least one of the Lackawanna Six in prison revealed that that defendant had never so much as met Mr. Al-Dossari. I understand that he was also questioned at Guantanamo about this.
The Talking Dog: Do you know what the charges or allegations of the Government are with respect to your other clients still detained? What are they? What were the charges against the clients who were released? Was there any rationale, rhyme or reason or explanation given for why some were released, and some still held?
Joshua Colangelo Bryan: Again, other than the limited (if any) explanations given by the CSRT, there is absolutely no explanation ever given of why anyone is detained, or why anyone is released.
The Talking Dog: Do you know who Abdullah Mesud is (leading a guerrilla movement in Pakistan)? Are you aware of allegations that Mahmoud Habib trained AQ in hand to hand combat? Any explanation for why he gets released, and your other clients get released, but Al-Dossari, Al-Blooshi and Al-Murbati are not? Do you think this is a fundamental problem with the arbitrariness of the whole process? Any way we can convince the public that it is the arbitrariness- and not the release- that is the problem?
Joshua Colangelo Bryan: Well, how does one reconcile the detention of my clients on the thinnest of accusations, while releasing an Australian who allegedly trained Al Qaeda terrorists including the 9-11 hijackers in martial arts and hand to hand combat–
The Talking Dog: You’re referring to Mahmoud Habib... who was released just ahead of proceedings in an action complaining of his side trip to Egypt for “extraordinary rendition” where he alleges he was tortured...
Joshua Colangelo Bryan: Exactly... Or a number of British prisoners who were released because Tony Blair insisted that it was politically necessary for him that they be released, a similar situation that has occurred with other European governments. By contrast, very few prisoners from Arab countries have been released. I am familiar with Abdullah Mesud in passing and from reading about him– but the fact that he is released, and my clients continue to be held just shows that there is no rhyme or reason to the system that has been set up.
The Talking Dog: Anything else that I should have asked you, or that my readers, the American public, the Bahraini public, or anyone else needs to know about your representations, or anything else?
Joshua Colangelo Bryan: We should all know that by our military’s own admissions, there are innocent men at Guantanamo Bay, and they have been horrifically abused. Not only is this legally and ethically disastrous, it is bad strategically, and ultimately, politically counterproductive.
The Talking Dog: I’m sure I join all of my readers in saying thank you for that most informative interview.
Comments
I had been employed by Wachenhut Inc. (private prison system) which changed their name to GEO Inc. (who has been active with Guatanomo Bay) when I worked at one of their prisons in Kyle, Texas as a chemical dependency counselor. I know how irrational, abusive and unprofessional the staff is and the correctional officers are trained and encouraged to be abusive. The "modified" Therapeutic Community model that all these prisons have been using is a very confrontational form of abuse designed to tear down and rebuild the offender (in the name of treatment) that has been used in Texas and many other states for over 13 years with convicted drug offenders. There is no escape from the constant mental torture and mind/behavior control and this modality of treatment can be corrupted by the correctional profession and turned into pure torture. With this much evolution in the growth of psychological torture (in the name of treatment) with our own prisoners, it is not surprising that we now have such an accepted mode of operation with POWs.
Could we not call a spade "a spade" ?
Guantanamo is a Concentration Camp - nothing else ! Similiar to what the nazi's operated. What happens there is meant to be secret as it was in Germany. Americans generally don't believe what goes on there, similiar to the Germans' denial of what occurred in their "camps"
There's another good account of what Guantanamo is like at an ACLU blog.
Yes, it is our concentration camp. We last had one in the Philipines I think (could be wrong -- 20s Nicaragua?)
The broken record paradigm of the Bush Administration has a number of variations, suich as a record of breaking nearly 800 continuous years of the Magna Carta, or his record budget deficits, or his record numbers of "signing statements" or record attendance at protests against he and his policies or American lawlessness and universal derision...
The President's current stated point is that Congress (the lower house, that is) refused to pass his version of "the protect America act", or whatever Orwellian term he has for retroactive immunity for private telecom companies that cooperated in unconstitutional invasions of our freedoms and privacy.
The irony, of course, is that the President is absolutely right on this. Congress continues to endanger this nation each and every minute that it refuses to entertain his impeachment and conduct ongoing investigations of the rampant lawlessness that the executive branch has subjected us to over these last seven years and change. Just over 340 days until, presumably, someone else gets to start cleaning up his mess.
This paper, "The Right to Dissent" explores the current situation of attacks upon and criminalization of dissent, from the surveillance of activists to the federalization of local law enforcement, to the labeling of activists as "terrorists." It presents a vision for the First 100 Days of the next President's administration that repudiates such attacks and upholds the First Amendment and our human rights. 
