iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

CIA Interrogators Threatened To Kill Detainee's Children: Report

First Posted: 09/24/09 06:12 AM ET Updated: 05/25/11 02:55 PM ET

Cia

By STEVEN R. HURST and DEVLIN BARRETT, Associated Press Writers

WASHINGTON - CIA interrogators threatened to kill the children of one detainee at the height of the Bush administration's war on terror and implied that another's mother would be sexually assaulted, newly declassified documents revealed Monday as the government launched a criminal investigation into the spy agency's "unauthorized, improvised, inhumane" practices.

At the same time, the Obama administration announced a new policy for future interrogations -- under White House supervision.

With the release of the five-year-old CIA documents, the Justice Department began a probe into the spy agency's tactics, under the direction of a veteran prosecutor who has been looking into other aspects of the interrogations.

The documents released by the CIA's inspector general said interrogators went too far -- even beyond what was authorized under Justice Department legal memos that have since been withdrawn and discredited.

"Ten years from now we're going to be sorry we're doing this (but) it has to be done," one unidentified CIA officer said in the report, predicting that interrogators would someday have to appear in court to answer for such tactics.

Monday's documents represent the largest single release of information about the Bush administration's once-secret system of capturing terrorism suspects and interrogating them in overseas prisons.

In one instance, suspect Abd al-Nashiri, the alleged mastermind of the 2000 USS Cole bombing, was hooded and handcuffed and threatened with an unloaded gun and a power drill. The unidentified interrogator also threatened Nashiri's mother and family, implying that they would be sexually abused in front of him, according to the report.

Death threats violate anti-torture laws, and the interrogator denied making a direct threat.

In another instance, an interrogator pinched the carotid artery of a detainee until he started to pass out, then shook him awake. He did this three times. The interrogator said he had never been instructed on how to conduct detainee questioning.

Investigators credited the detention-and-interrogation program for identifying terrorist plots and developing key intelligence.

"In this regard, there is no doubt that the program has been effective," investigators wrote.

But it's unclear whether so-called "enhanced interrogation" tactics contributed to that success, according to the report. Those tactics include waterboarding, a simulated drowning technique that the Obama administration says is torture. Measuring the success of such interrogation is "a more subjective process and not without some concern," the report said.

In the hours before the report was released, a Justice Department official, speaking only on condition of anonymity because the official was not authorized to discuss the matter, said Attorney General Eric Holder would appoint veteran prosecutor John Durham to investigate the claims of abuse.

Durham is already investigating the destruction of CIA interrogation videos. He now will examine whether CIA officers or contractors broke laws in harsh handling of suspects.

President Barack Obama's press secretary, Robert Gibbs, said Monday that CIA interrogators of terror suspects would not be prosecuted if they acted within legal guidelines laid out at the time of the questioning.

However, the CIA inspector general's report said officers had used "unauthorized, improvised, inhumane and undocumented detention and interrogation techniques."

The administration also announced Monday that all U.S. interrogators will follow the rules for detainees laid out by the Army Field Manual. That decision aims to end years of fierce debate over how rough U.S. personnel can get with terror suspects in custody.

Formation of the new interrogation unit for "high-value" detainees does not mean the CIA is out of the business of questioning terror suspects, deputy White House press secretary Bill Burton told reporters covering the vacationing president on Martha's Vineyard in Massachusetts.

Burton said the unit will include "all these different elements under one group" and will be located at the FBI headquarters in Washington.

The structure of the new unit the White House is creating would depart significantly from such work under the previous administration, when the CIA had the lead and sometimes exclusive role in questioning al-Qaida suspects.

Obama campaigned vigorously against the Bush administration's interrogation practices in his successful run for the presidency. He has said more recently he didn't particularly favor prosecuting Bush administration officials in connection with instances of prisoner abuse. Obama still believes "we should be looking forward, not backward," Burton said Monday.

Nonetheless, the spokesman added, Obama believes the attorney general should be fully independent from the White House and he has full faith in Holder to make the decision on whether to reopen several such cases with an eye toward possible criminal prosecution. "He ultimately is going to make the decisions," Burton said of Holder.

CIA Director Leon Panetta said in an e-mail message to agency employees Monday that he intends "to stand up for those officers who did what their country asked and who followed the legal guidance they were given. That is the president's position, too," he said.

Panetta said some CIA officers have been disciplined for going beyond the methods approved for interrogations by the Bush-era Justice Department. Just one CIA employee_ contractor David Passaro_ has been prosecuted for detainee abuse.

"The CIA has played a vital role in the work of the task force, and its substantive knowledge will be essential to interrogations going forward," agency spokesman George Little said Monday.

The administration confirmed the new interrogation unit on the same day the CIA inspector general unveiled a report on Bush administration handling of suspects. A federal judge ordered the report to be made public in response to a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union.

In the future, all questioning of terror suspects will fall under the rules of the Army manual.

The manual, last updated in September 2006, prohibits forcing detainees to be naked, threatening them with military dogs, exposing them to extreme heat or cold, conducting mock executions, depriving them of food, water, or medical care, and waterboarding.

Subjecting prisoner abuse cases to a new review and possible prosecution could expose CIA employees and agency contractors to criminal prosecution for the alleged mistreatment of terror suspects in the years after the Sept. 11 attacks.

___

Associated Press Writers Pamela Hess and Jennifer Loven in Washington and Philip Elliott in Oak Bluffs, Mass., contributed to this story.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS

By STEVEN R. HURST and DEVLIN BARRETT, Associated Press Writers WASHINGTON - CIA interrogators threatened to kill the children of one detainee at the height of the Bush administration's war on terr...
By STEVEN R. HURST and DEVLIN BARRETT, Associated Press Writers WASHINGTON - CIA interrogators threatened to kill the children of one detainee at the height of the Bush administration's war on terr...
Filed by Nick Graham  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 582
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (10 total)
10:27 AM on 08/25/2009
John Yoo has spoken eloquently on this point from the perspective of a neocon.

http://www.infowars.com/articles/ps/torture_yoo_being_asked_justify_crushing_childrens_testicls.htm
10:44 AM on 08/25/2009
I read where Yoo worked for Orrin Hatch.
10:15 AM on 08/25/2009
MJHammonds got hot under the collar and denied Bundy converted to Mormonism, poster RichMisty gave a comparison of the of the tortures to ted bundy.

http://www.cityweekly.net/utah/article-7357-the-baptism-of-ted-bundy.html

Bundy moved to Salt Lake City and began attending law school at the University of Utah. The following year, he joined the LDS Church.

Was Ted Bundy’s name removed from Mormon rolls because of his brutal crimes? Even if Bundy was excommunicated from the LDS Church, he was listed as Theodore Robert Cowell in the online IGI of the posthumously baptized, until Feb. 11, 2009. After leaving a blood-soaked trail of bodies and wounded families, can Ted Bundy, the poster boy of serial killers, now accept or reject the offer of celestial glory? Is this Mormon justice?
http://www.cityweekly.net/utah/article-7357-the-baptism-of-ted-bundy.html
10:27 AM on 08/25/2009
sadly, there is an attraction of brutal, compromised personalities thriving in the LDS experience, example, Mitchell, Jessen, Byebee, Flanagan, DeLand, and is buddy. plus many others.

No doubt, they are reading too many of the Nephites and Laminite stories, and it has gone to their heads, or the "extermination of gentiles" which was to be done in the July 4 speech given by the Mormons, -- yes, it is historical fact, the Mormons were going to kill all gentiles, and spoke these words which cased the the people to chase them out and to the west. It is a part of the history, the LDS church will not tell.

So, murdering people who are opposed to them is normal thought, and not giving a second thought to Muslims, or "gentiles". (gentiles would be anyone outside the LDS faith)
08:39 AM on 08/25/2009
The documents released Monday clearly demonstrate that the individuals subjected to Enhanced Interrogation Techniques provided the bulk of intelligence we gained about al Qaeda. This intelligence saved lives and prevented terrorist attacks. These detainees also, according to the documents, played a role in nearly every capture of al Qaeda members and associates since 2002. The activities of the CIA in carrying out the policies of the Bush Administration were directly responsible for defeating all efforts by al Qaeda to launch further mass casualty attacks against the United States. The people involved deserve our gratitude. They do not deserve to be the targets of political investigations or prosecutions. President Obama’s decision to allow the Justice Department to investigate and possibly prosecute CIA personnel, and his decision to remove authority for interrogation from the CIA to the White House, serves as a reminder, if any were needed, of why so many Americans have doubts about this Administration’s ability to be responsible for our nation’s security.
09:54 AM on 08/25/2009
The White House (President Obama) does not have the legal authority to tell the Justice Department who they should and should not prosecute. The Justice Department is an independent entity.

What the documents don't say is if there were other more humane techniques that could have been used to gain the same information.

If we go down the slippery slope of excusing the means to the end when the means were clearly crimes, then we are no better than those nations that we claim to be trying to rid the world of. We become a rogue nation that does not play by the rules if the rules don't suit us.

I would understand your point if anything at all had been done with the information in terms of capturing bin Laden, but the information gotten from the detainees never led to his capture. In fact, as we approach the 8th anniversary of 9/11, bin Laden still runs free and is apparently in no danger of being captured.

Meanwhile you want to conclude that because our Justice Department wants to prosecute crimes, we are no longer safe.
11:20 AM on 08/25/2009
thats from Cheney
photo
OliverTwist
Contrarian advocate for truth and justice
07:49 AM on 08/25/2009
What they haven't revealed yet, is that US agents took and held hostage the sons and daughters and husbands and wives and fathers and mothers of people and promised to torture and kill them if their relatives did not collaborate. Pictures were no doubt taken as evidence of the seriousness of the threats.

Given all that we know - including the large number of women and children of targets that were held - it is hard to believe that this criminal tactic was not used.
photo
OliverTwist
Contrarian advocate for truth and justice
07:39 AM on 08/25/2009
It may be that the best way to obtain actual prosecutions and convictions for war crimes will be to make the evidence public and then push the criminals to travel to other countries where they can be arrested and tried in less corrupted jurisdictions. Depending on justice from international courts may be the only way.

The current situation is in many regards similar to the difficulty of prosecuting and convicting southern criminals of torturing and killing blacks in the past.

Some of the personalities are even related.
photo
OliverTwist
Contrarian advocate for truth and justice
07:12 AM on 08/25/2009
One of the problems we face is that many of the brutal terror tactics employed by the CIA and other US agents are supported by a substantial number of depraved Americans. It will be just as hard to convict US war criminals in US courts as it would be to convict al-Qeada terrorists and war criminals in Taliban courts. America has become a nation of sociopaths.

Too bad.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
PRONESE
Somewhat Opinionated Curmudgeon
06:22 AM on 08/25/2009
Folks,
*
*
Link to the document 25_08_09_cia_2004_report.pdf can be found here:
*
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/25_08_09_cia_2004_report.pdf
*
Read it first. It is very interesting.
*
Posish!
*
R/ PRONESE
05:30 AM on 08/25/2009
Here's a compromise:


RED STATES will utilize enhanced interrogation techniques on Islamic terrorists who seek to impose their religious autocracy on the rest of the world, and slaughter anyone disagreeing with them;

- and -

BLUE STATES can use those techniques against AMERICAN CIA agents!
----------¬----------¬----------¬----------¬----------¬----------¬----------¬----------¬----------¬----------

Sound about right?

Hey REGISTERED INDEPENDENTS - CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW?
05:22 AM on 08/25/2009
Will I, in this lifetime, be able not to have to go to the depths of sorrow each time I realize how low my country has gone and how far away it has gotten from the wonderful dream that gave birth to it?
03:54 AM on 08/25/2009
How is saying to someone that you are going to kill them or their children or whatever considered torture? There are many things that fall on the category of torture but I don't see that being one of them...
03:43 AM on 08/25/2009
Ok, I can see how waterboarding is torture; electric shock and cutting off fingers is definitely torture. But I don't see how saying that you are going to kill someone or their children or whatever is considered torture.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:54 AM on 08/25/2009
Eric Holder?

Hmm, Eric Holder, Eric Holder, rings a bell.........oh yeah! Isn't he the guy involved in pardoning the FALN terrorists?

Just a pro-terrorist AG, doing what comes naturally.
06:08 AM on 08/25/2009
mich,

Don't forget he's the one who also arranged the 'Cash for Pardon' services for Marc Rich.

Another example of where the radical left will look the other way on 'principle' when it doesn't serve their needs!
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
jasev01
01:43 AM on 08/25/2009
Is it really terrorist to terrorize terrorists? Isn't it a fulfillment of the golden rule. or just justice.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
PaiaGirl
Progressive Engineer
01:48 AM on 08/25/2009
yes.

There are two types of peopel:

A. (the vast majority) People who are unable to bring themselves to torture

B. (a tiny, tiny number) People who get off on torture

I guess you are type B.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
jasev01
01:57 AM on 08/25/2009
I think you are wrong. There is a third type, those who don't like what they have to do but do it because it is necessary because they are mature enough to know that the world does not turn into gumdrops and candy canes because you close your eyes and pretend.

Its much like the solider or police officer who doesn't "get off" on killing other people but does it because they must.
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
jasev01
02:10 AM on 08/25/2009
And for the record is it more humane to pull the trigger and kill the individual who may be innocent or to pretend to?
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Phreaked
In Brightest Day, In Blackest Night
02:24 AM on 08/25/2009
Its actually just vengeance if you want to put it that way, eye for an eye. Problem with eye for an eye is that eventually everyone is blind.

Also its against the law as this report insinuated
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
BetterDeadThanRed09
Pace University '14
01:22 AM on 08/25/2009
The bush-cheney crime family will do anything to defeat and defraud government.
photo
Blankman
I'm afraid of other people's towels
06:45 AM on 08/25/2009
Old, tired rhetoric.
12:22 AM on 08/25/2009
Wrong is wrong. Have to prosecute those who did wrong.