Ex-FBI agent Ali Soufan’s account of the interrogation of Abu Zubaydah is roughly this: he and several other interrogators from both FBI and CIA objected to the application of torture techniques from at least April to June 2002 (after which point Soufan left the interrogation team) from a former SERE psychologist and CIA contractor named James Mitchell. Ultimately Mitchell’s techniques — the waterboard, the "confinement box" — received the blessing of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel on August 1, 2002, though Abu Zubaydah was treated harshly before then.
NPR’s Ari Shapiro adds significant new information to that picture. According to Shapiro, Mitchell was in frequent contact with the CIA’s Counterterrorist Center from the site at which Abu Zubaydah was being held, asking for approval for the use of his techniques, and the ACLU yesterday obtained a document to support the claim. Counterterrorist Center officials apparently ran the gauntlet for approving the techniques up to White House counsel Alberto Gonzales.
The source says nearly every day, Mitchell would sit at his computer and write a top secret cable to the CIA’s counterterrorism center. Each day, Mitchell would request permission to use enhanced interrogation techniques on Zubaydah. The source says the CIA would then forward the request to the White House, where White House counsel Alberto Gonzales would sign off on the technique. That would provide the Administration’s legal blessing for Mitchell to increase the pressure on Zubaydah in the next interrogation.
A new document is consistent with the source’s account.
Late May 19, the CIA sent the ACLU a spreadsheet as part of a lawsuit under the Freedom of Information Act. The log shows the number of top secret cables that went from Zubaydah’s black site prison to CIA headquarters each day. Through the spring and summer of 2002, the log shows someone sent headquarters several cables a day.
Now, note that Gonzales at the time wasn’t the attorney general. He wasn’t the chief legal official for the government. He was the president’s lawyer, powerless to bless the actions of a federal agency like the CIA. (Shapiro quotes a number of ex-officials who establish that point.) A separate CIA-White House channel in the spring of 2002 would, at the least, contextualize the CIA’s efforts at getting the approval of the Justice Department for the harsh interrogation regimen — though it’s unclear what legal butt-covering Gonzales would have been able to provide in the first place. Gonzales didn’t respond to NPR, according to Shapiro.
If you go to this page and click on "List of Contemporaneous and Derivative Records (May 18, 2009)" then you can see this voluminous log. There are 580 listed communications from the "field" to CIA headquarters, almost all from 2002, and beginning April 13, 2002. It takes until communication #471 before reaching a point in time when the communication could be about a different detainee from Abu Zubaydah, since it’s not until sometime in November 2002 that Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, another detainee the CIA waterboarded, was detained. And 249 of these communications occur before the August 1, 2002 Office of Legal Counsel memo blessing the torture techniques Mitchell advocated. There is no indication of the substance of any of the communications. [UPDATE: Marcy emails to remind me that the International Committee of the Red Cross' report on the CIA's ex-detainees lists al-Nashiri's arrest as occurring in October 2002 in Dubai, so there are 415 communications that could only be about Abu Zubaydah, not 470. The ACLU's Jameel Jaffer says that these logs, obtained thanks to their lawsuit about the CIA's destroyed torture tapes, only concern the interrogations of Abu Zubaydah and al-Nashiri.]
This still doesn’t address a central question raised by Soufan’s testimony to a Senate Judiciary panel. If Soufan is telling the truth, then someone at the CIA must have overruled the agency’s own torture-dissenting interrogators at the Abu Zubaydah interrogation in favor of Mitchell, an agency contractor. Did any of them send cables to the Counterterrorist Center? Was the Counterterrorist Center aware of their objections to torturing Abu Zubaydah? And if so, why did they overrule their own officers in favor of a contractor who didn’t come from an agency that conducts interrogations? Cofer Black was head of the Counterterrorist Center when the interrogation of Abu Zubaydah began — he’s now an official with Blackwater Xe — and Jose Rodriguez, he of the torture-tapes destruction scandal, took over for Black in May 2002. What did they know and when did they know it? How many of the communications to CIA headqurters listed in the logs were from CIA interrogators at Abu Zubaydah’s interrogation chamber objecting to Mitchell’s techniques?
Steve Kleinman, an Air Force Reserve colonel and a trained interrogator affiliated with the military office that oversees the SERE program, told me last week that the real linchpins here aren’t Mitchell and his SERE colleague, Bruce Jessen, but the senior CIA officials who gave them contracts in late 2001 and "brought [them] in with eyes wide open, to run an interrogation program." These logs give Kleinman more support for that proposition.
Crossposted to The Streak. Everyone sees Marcy’s post on this, right?
Login Here




43 Comments
Spotlight


Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About ATTACKERMAN
Advanced search
RSS/XML Feed
Wow!
Attack, man, atTACK!
Everyone sees Marcy’s post on this, right?
Excellent piece Spencer!
Pre-AGAG, makes sense since he was a tool.
Thanks..good NPR report on this. A concluding snark/condemnation in the report that if Gonzales was giving legal advice here the whole agency/govt. apparatus was broken. Conclusion on last 8 years, yes? Thank you for your work.
According to Angler, when the DOJ wouldn’t sign off on warrantless wiretaps in March 2004, Addington replaced the line on the authorization form reserved for a DOJ signature with a line for Gonzales to sign.
Sounds like that March 11, 2004 signature might not have been the first time Gonzales signed off on things for which he had no authority.
No, but I’m on it now. You two ought to be in pictures! *g*
real nicccce.
Yep. Just came over here from there.
Bob in HI
Ari Shapiro is one of NPR’s best young reporters. He gives me hope that the whole shop won’t just turn into Jim Lehrer. Besides, now perhaps NPR feels like it has a little more elbow room.
Bob in HI
That’s a great catch, Peterr. I wonder if this incident was the prologue to subbing AG for Comey on the surveillance programs.
Speaking of Did you read this post or that post, I’ve been wondering lately if there is generally fewer commenters here lately. I know there are some threads that get a lot of comments, but it seems to me that there are times when it gets quiet. I’m just wondering what other long time pups think.
Bush gone? Focus on certain issues too much? I don’t know, which is why I’m asking you, all.
Could the torture communications maybe corroborate the allegation that there were live streaming video hook-ups for the torture sessions in the White House and the Vice President’s office?
Time to cook dinner!
From pages 111-112 of the DOJ OIG’s report on “A Review of the FBI’s Involvement in and Observations of Detainee Interrogations in Guantanamo Bay, Afghanistan, and Iraq” dated May 2008:
(My Bold)
This would appear to be the corroboration for your first bolded section. The DOJIG report doesn’t give the clearest narrative and timeline — you’re reading about Abu Z in chapter four and then again in chapter 11, for instance — but what else could count as “the highest levels”?
Devil’s advocate options: (1) CIA misunderstood or misrepresented its authorization; (2) CIA never recognized the controlling legal authority of the White House counsel’s office, since… it doesn’t, like, have any.
Good q demi, I’ve looked at that also but not thought about it.,
For me, lots of issues and things in the planet to watch, wander, wonder and worry about.
So I tend to latch to that which GETS to me, and to do that, I wander.
There’s such a wealth and dearth of things to worry about, from banking/financial, to big agra, to war machine, to paid and bought pols, big biz, pentagon, and our own government run amuk, that it’s hard to keep up with it all from any one site . . . . or 20 sites. *G*
So, MY response to your posit, is I wander, a lot, in search of info . . .
And FDL is one of the sites i wander to, often . . . more often, lately, I have less to comment on, than I have need to read, and absorb other comments in posts I read . . .
And I always get a mind full in here . . . be it Spencer’s, Tbogg’s, or EW’s, or any other FDL hatchling.
But for some things, I go elsewhere . . . I think, keeping up on all I want to know, I tend to comment less.
Make any sense to ya? Thanks for asking . . . .
Thank you for your honesty.
Sometimes no response says a lot. Meaning, everyone else besides dear cooking Raven. Still.
Oh well.
You’re welcome. But, during those times when there were a lot of comments, weren’t there also lots of things to check out? Lots of issues on the plate now, as well as then, so I’m still wondering.
No one here has been an intelligence officer.
No one here has accepted what it is to lie as a matter of course.
Everyone here expects truth, as a matter of course.
If you are an army intelligence officer, you lie. You lie as to your identity, as to the work you do, as to everything, except what you report to the person higher up the food chain.
Heck, we shoveled a truck load of dirt over to the community garden after work and NOW flippin the flapjacks. It’s
summertime
summertime
sum sum summertime!
all this depressing shit will be here when we gat back!
Say what? There is an intelligence section, S-2, in every Army Unit. It’s not some big secret.
You are assuming a lot.
You could be right, you could be mistaken.
Whatever.
Great post Spencer. This bit from the end of Ari Shapiro’s interview appears to be key:
A charade indeed. The torture regime was up and going, all the legal niceties were entirely beside the point. Torture was a foregone conclusion, so yes, the legal and policy review process was a charade. Had those within the administration given a damn about what was legal and what was not, torture could not have been approved. For anyone who participated in the process to think otherwise requires some pretty serious self-delusion.
I’m cooking pork chops.
PS I’m never sure how much sarcasm or reality are in your comments.
There were, are, certain issues that capture large audiences.
There are, certain times when the FDL pups seem to come out and romp.
And, the world is more complex, even from a year ago.
And, there are more sources for the world’s issues than a year ago.
The blogosphere, and the world, is growing as it all shrinks . . . *G*
And people have personal issues and priorities, that change, also . . .
Mz Hamsher, and her coherts, have done much to capture our attention.
And I want to extend my laurel and hardy appreciation to those who comment. I’ve learned so much, and found so many links, from comment efforts, that are just off the hook good as the source threads are. Truly, a HUGE and great and knowledgeable community in here that shares what they know.
You folks, you make the rest of us, better than we are on our own, and I thank you all for it. I’d list people, but it’s endless . . . and ’sides, if ya commented here, yer on the list . . *G*
I think they still get it . . . . cuz after some tweaks and changes, from two to three years ago, FDL has emerged to be a leader of information gathering and sharing . . . . and I’ve realized that’s what I want from a blog.
I want info. I want knowledge I can’t get elsewhere.
But, to fill my belly full of want of knowledge, I still have to roam and wander.
Koz is Koz, and others are others.
FDL has it’s place, and it’s a prominent one, methinks. Mz Hamsher has worked hard to define this here niche.
I wasn’t always for it, but I am now . . . . *G* .
Ummm, pork chops!! *G*
You cooking inside, or outside?
Man there’s a million ways to do them . . . .
What’s yer way? *G
That would really surprise me. Wouldn’t Bush and Cheney have preferred plausible deniability?
Then again, I haven’t seen that account before. Where’s it from?
Dipped in egg and flour and then pan fried.
That’s tonight. Next time could be barbequed.
Or
(3) Alberto “Fredo” Gonzales misrepresented his own authority as White House Counsel.
(4) Alberto “Fredo” Gonzales did not misrepresent his approvals back to the CIA folks because his boss, Dubya was told and gave the go-ahead.
(5) (4) Alberto “Fredo” Gonzales did misrepresent the approvals because Dick Cheney and David Addington gave him the go-ahead, and they had no such authority.
With those, I think we’ve about got it all covered. *g*
Yep. That’s been my experience too. How ’bout that?
Seasonings, beside salt and pepper?
*G*
I’m outta here, time to tend to home stuff . . .
Pleasure chattin with ya, and reading all the others on this thread.
Man, we gotta keep the pressure on the PTB, or we won’t get any change at all . . . .
Rawhk On Pups . . *G*
Yeah, that about runs the gamut.
I know you’re gone, but just lemon pepper.
It’s always nice when we can chat. Too. And, also. *g*
Spencer, I want to compliment both you and EW for jumping on this latest find!
Now having said that, I found this ABC News report, dated May 12, 2009 that had already identified Fredo as the source of the “approvals” for Abu Zubaydah’s intial torture regime:
None hatsoever!
Page 3 of the SSCI torture narrative. In April 2002 “attorneys from the CIA’s Office of General Counsel began discussions with the Legal Adviser to the National Security Council and OLC concerning the CIA’s proposed interrogation plan for Abu Zubaydah and legal restrictions on that interrogation. CIA records indicate that the Legal Adviser to the National Security Council briefed the National Security Adviser, Deputy National Security Adviser, and Counsel to the President, as well as the Attorney General and the head of the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice.”
It is from a 12/23/08 post by Wayne Madsen on http://www.waynemadsenreport.com, entitled, “Connell’s high-tech network active against Gore in 2000″.
If you cannot access on the site, you could email wmreditor@waynemadsenreport.com. I have brought this up before on FDL, but no one seems to believe it. There’s so much incredible stuff these “evil-doers” have dredged up…one has to just not be afraid of the facts.
A most excellent set of fingerprints you have there Spencer! *g*
So, if folks like the Attorney General were in the loop, just WTF was Fredo doing authorizing this CIA torture as White House Counsel?
Or was AG Ashcroft deliberately bailing, knowing full well that someday the chickens would come home to roost?
Shorter AG Ashcroft: “Not my fookin’ fingerprints! No fookin’ way!”
spence, you MUST look into “team b”, a faction of the CIA brought in by Rumsfeld/Cheney (Cheney was the underling) way back when Nixon left office in shame
both were members of Nixon’s staff however when ford took over they set in motion a series of events to undermine Nixon’s treaty of détente
check out important points from tom hartmann
this team created false information, information the actual analysts from the CIA called ridiculous
I believe they are the “Cheney leave behinds” that are responsible for the current “CIA issues”, in my mind almost certainly created by “team b” and not the professionals
The simple answer is that AlbearTOE was grooming himself to become Atty General by doing Bush’s dirty work (as he had done for years back in Texas). Jackass Pious Republican as he was, Eagle Sore Ashcroft was still not willing to play 24/7 Bushball. As we know, AlbearTOE was.