Al-Qahtani was a key prisoner, in that he was evidently a test or experimental case for various interrogation techniques. The Aug. 2, 2002 Gitmo minutes on a “counter-resistance strategy” meeting at Guantanamo (the one that included CIA counsel Fredman, of whom Spencer wrote the other day) specifically mentions analyzing the “certain types of deprivation and psychological stressors” used on al-Qahtani.

It’s a very good, very comprehensive article by Spencer, but I have two additions. One is to note that it was the FBI’s supposed “effective” interrogation that brought about the “intel” on Jose Padilla and the “dirty bomb”, claims that never held up, if they were ever true in any sense to begin with.

Secondly, the record of the FBI is far worse than usually portrayed, and again Spencer is right on this, though he need not be apologetic. The FBI abuse begins right after 9/11, especially with the case of John Walker Lindh, per the narrative of former Justice Department official Jesselyn Radack:

In 2001, I told the Criminal Division, which was advising the FBI in Afghanistan, that Lindh could not be interrogated without his counsel. That was on a Friday. The Criminal Division called back on Monday and said that the FBI had interrogated him anyway. They wanted to know what to do. I advised that the interview would have to be sealed and used only for national security purposes or intelligence-gathering, not criminal prosecution. Again, my advice was ignored.

Three months later, I inadvertently learned of a discovery order, which had been deliberately concealed from me, for all Justice Department correspondence related to Lindh’s interrogation. When I went to comply, my e-mails had been purged from the file. With the help of technical support, I recovered them from my computer, turned them over to my boss, took home a copy in case they “disappeared” again, and resigned.

As the criminal case barreled toward trial, the Justice Department continued to assert that Lindh was never represented by counsel and that his rights had been “carefully, scrupulously guarded.” I did not believe the Justice Department would have the temerity to make public statements contradicted by its own court filings if my e-mails had indeed reached the court. So I blew the whistle, which unleashed a torrent of retaliation….

In 2002, my lawyer made it abundantly clear to the OIG that I took several steps to thwart efforts to conceal material regarding Lindh’s interrogation from the court. In January 2003, Inspector General Glenn Fine, who issued the recent FBI report, told my attorney that the OIG had looked into my whistleblower allegations and was not going to pursue them. (OIG did not look too searchingly because it did not even bother to interview me, the complainant.) To add insult to injury, OIG turned my case over for criminal prosecution, which eventually closed with no charges ever being brought. But the Justice Department was not through with me yet. It put me on the “No-Fly List” and referred me to the state bars in which I’m licensed as an attorney, based on a secret report – by the OIG – to which I did not have access. [emphasis in original]

When the DoJ OIG report came out, I labeled it “a limited hangout, i.e., an admission of some crimes, but a cover-up of the total barbaric scenario unfolding in Bush’s torture prisons.”

The ACLU said:

“Today’s OIG report reveals that top government officials in the Defense Department, CIA and even as high as the White House turned a blind eye to torture and abuse and failed to act aggressively to end it,” said Anthony D. Romero, Executive Director of the ACLU. “Moreover, the country’s top law enforcement agency — the FBI — did not take measures to enforce the law but only belatedly reported on the law’s violations. It’s troubling that the government seems to have been more concerned with obscuring the facts than with enforcing the law and stopping the torture and abuse of detainees. Had the government taken action in 2002, perhaps the disgrace of Abu Ghraib and other abuses could have been avoided.”

Note, btw, that the OIG report says that the CIA never allowed OIG to interview Zubaydah; such questioning then might have cleared up some of the questions we have now.

Keep asking the questions, Spencer. I think we’ll find that while some FBI agents protested, most were concerned, and certainly the agency itself was mostly concerned with covering its own legal ass. We will also find that some higher officials in FBI were more closely tied to the SERE story than has been thus far revealed.

Obama administration threatens Britain to keep torture evidence concealed