Truthout Original

Despite FBI Dissent, Torture Continued

by: Christopher Kuttruff, t r u t h o u t | Report

photo
The hand of a prisoner at Guantanamo Bay (Photo: Robb Kendrick / National Geographic)

    In a report released this month by the Department of Justice (DOJ), the Office of Inspector General (OIG) outlined concerns within the FBI regarding interrogation techniques used by the military in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

    The 438-page report details frequent shifts in Department of Defense (DOD) policies, confusion of military personnel as to proper interrogation protocol and accounts of brutal interrogation that departed from prior military procedures described in the Army Field Manual.

    The FBI's Legal Handbook for Special Agents states, "It is the policy of the FBI that no attempt be made to obtain a statement by force, threats, or promises." Furthermore, the FBI's Manual for Administrative and Operational Procedures specifies that "no brutality, physical violence, duress or intimidation of individuals by our employees will be countenanced...."

    The OIG report explained that after the 9/11 attacks, the FBI was forced to reevaluate the implications of cooperating with other agencies (particularly the military in Guantanamo (GTMO), Iraq and Afghanistan), given the differences in their respective approaches to interrogation. According to the OIG report, "FBI agents told us that they have always been trained to adhere to FBI protocols, not to other agencies' rules with respect to interview policies or evidence collection."

    The differences in protocol, the report states, led to tension and conflicts between FBI and DOD employees.

    Until late 2002, the military relied on sections of the Army Field Manual for guidelines on permissible interrogation techniques; however, in December 2002, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld approved an additional set of techniques for use at GTMO, which included "stress positions for a maximum of 4 hours, isolation, deprivation of light and auditory stimuli, hooding, 20-hour interrogations, removal of clothing, exploiting a detainee's individual phobias (such as fear of dogs)."

    The DOD "also approved the use of dietary manipulation, environmental manipulation, sleep adjustment, and isolation," the OIG report outlines. These interrogation tactics remained in effect for GTMO until September 2006 when the US Army introduced Field Manual 2-22.3.

    Secretary Rumsfeld resigned from his office in November 2006.

    Army Field Manual 2-22.3 was adopted in response to The Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, which required a uniform standard for treatment of detainees under DOD custody. The Detainee Treatment Act, which passed through Congress with an overwhelming majority, was undercut by several factors which greatly reduced its substance. A Graham-Levin amendment to the legislation stated: "(e) Except as provided in section 1005 of the Detainee Treatment Act of 2005, no court, justice, or judge shall have jurisdiction to hear or consider--(1) an application for a writ of habeas corpus filed by or on behalf of an alien detained by the Department of Defense at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba."

    Further diminishing the Detainee Treatment Act's efficacy, the legislation did not specify which version of the Army Field Manual should be followed (allowing for potential changes to protocol later on). The Act also did not apply to the CIA.

    As a final loophole, President George W. Bush issued a signing statement insisting that his authority as commander in chief and head of the "unitary executive branch" allowed him to construe the legislation in a manner that would "protect the American people from further terrorist attacks."

    Human rights groups have asserted that not only did the actions by Congress and the president undermine the intent of The Detainee Treatment Act, but also contradicted the Supreme Court case, Rasul v. Bush, which ruled 6-3 to reverse a district court decision that claimed the Judicial Branch had no jurisdiction to hear habeas corpus-related cases involving foreigners held at Guantanamo Bay.

    The OIG report describes accounts of naked, sleep-deprived detainees - individuals frequently shackled, put into strenuous positions, exposed to loud music and extreme temperatures. The report also records a variety of other physical and psychological abuses.

    Human rights and other advocacy groups have fiercely criticized the DOJ, Congress, and the Bush administration for doing little to prevent interrogation abuses, especially given the extensive evidence of improper treatment of detainees in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay.

    "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, in a recent press release.

    Romero also stressed, "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.

    The lengthy OIG report, scattered with redacted sections, relies, in part, on a "war crimes" file that was initiated by FBI agents in 2002, but was later shut down by FBI officials who felt, according to the report, "investigating detainee allegations of abuse was not the FBI's mission."

»


Christopher Kuttruff is an editor and reporter for Truthout.

Comments

This is a moderated forum.  It may take a little while for comments to go live.

Pinochet suspects arrests

Pinochet suspects arrests ordered May 26, 2008, BBC NEWS http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/americas/7420796.stm A Chilean judge has ordered the arrest of nearly 100 former secret police and soldiers over rights abuses committed under General Augusto Pinochet. The round-up is one of the biggest of its kind since the military leader's rule ended 18 years ago.

Good for ACLU's

Good for ACLU's Romero... BUT, when will his ACLU call for Impeachment as they did for Nixon. Sorry, Anthony, we cannot let you off the hook on this one. Until you go full out and act on Impeachment of these mobsters parading as officials, raping the world's resources and trshing our treasuey along with our rights, then your words ring hollow. Do a full-page ad calling for Hearings as you did for Nixon, and thousandsof us wil pitch in to cover the costs.

I propose that each U.S.

I propose that each U.S. front line soldier in Iraq and in Afghanistan be issued immediately a mortal capsule of cyanide to be taken in the event of capture by...whoever we are fighting. Because by just using our OWN aggressive interrogation techniques, the other side can legally justify the death of any U.S. detainee as some mistake by an over-zealous 'Interrogator'. But I guess that aspect of the repercussion of their policies never occured to our govt. and the effect it would have in the field for the common 'grunt'. After all they aren't the ones doing the heavy lifting! Genklag

Honest Condi explained it

Honest Condi explained it all the other day: "...whatever was legal in the face of not just the attacks of Sept. 11, but the anthrax attacks that happened, we were in an environment in which saving America from the next attack was paramount." IOW, the FBI didn't get the memo that "saving" America from "the next attack" meant "whatever" was now legal. Indefinite detention without charge? Whatever. Torture? Whatever. Over a million dead/wounded innocents? Whatever. Tens of billions stolen by patriotic US contractors? Whatever. CIA NOC agent cover blown? Whatever. Illegal spying on Americans that accidentally started before 911? Clearly, the FBI hates America, because they're still working with the pre-911 definition of torture, not the new Whatever Yoo-Baybee-Fredo definition of torture, which says that if you're still breathing, it ain't torture. Stupid FBI...

It would likely be a

It would likely be a political liability to impeach Bush as it would detract from the effort to get the Republicans out of the white house. Even John McCain would oppose theses actions of Cheney~Bush. It would be nice to give some kind of special thank-you to Rumsfeld for our torture policy as well. Ashcroft Gonzales apparently gave torture their blessing and our new US Attorney Mukasey is not finding this troubling. If John McCain would lead a sincere fight to get Cheney and Bush impeached over this issue, now, right now it would improve his credibility as something other than Cheney~Bush Three.

Add a comment:

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
CAPTCHA
The following question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions. Please enter the two words seen below. If you cannot read them you may use the button with circling arrows to get a new one.