Appmued for Release 2013mm 10585671 busy NatSecAct CIA LOAN COPY DO NOT COPY Central Inlef gence Agency Impecror Gena-m SPECIAL REVIEW mm bus NatSecACl COUNTERTEERORISM DETENTION AND INTERROGATION ACTIVITIES SEPTEMBER 2001 OCTOBER 2003 2003-7123-16 TMay 2004 copy 19 NetSecAct NatSecAct Tor-seesaw mm bji3 NatSecAct D0006 Approved or Release 2015406110 1' Liar - - CIA LOAN COPY DO NOT COPY Central Intelligence Agency Inspector General SPECIAL REVIEW COUNTERTERRORISM DETENTEON AND NTERROGATION SEPTEMBER 2001 OCTOBER 2003 7 May 2004 NatSecAct 1 Approved for Release 2016 06 10 005856717 NatSecAct number of physicians Physician s Assistants and C035 completed the training for familiarization purposes Students completing the Interrogation Course are required to sign an acknowledgment that they have read understand and will comply with the Interrogation Guidelines NatSecAct ClAAct NatSecAct NatSecAct 70 1 1 69 In June 2003 CTC established a debrie ng course for Agency substantive experts who are involved in questioning detainees after they have undergone interrogation and have been deemed compliant The debrie ng course was established to train non-interrogators to collect actionable intelligence from high value detainees in CIA custody The course is intended to familiarize non-interrogators with key aspects of the Agency interrogation Program to include the Program s goals and legal authorities the DCI Interrogation Guidelines and the roles and responsibilities of all who interact with a high value detainee As of September 2003 three of these training sessions had been conducted with a total of individuals completing the training was contemplating establishing a similar training regimen for Security Protective Officers and linguists who will be assigned to interrogation sites INTERROGATION OPERATIONS AT NatSecAct The detention and interrogation activity examined during this Review occurred primarily at three facilities as was the facility at which two prominent Al-Qa ida detainees Abu Zubaydah and Al-Nashiri were held with the foreign host government s knowledge and approval until it was closed for operational security reasons in December 2002 The two detainees at that location were 1 Ebl 3l NatSecAct 39 U Physician s Assistants are formally trained to provide diagnostic therapeum preventative health care services They work under the supervision of a physician record progress notes and may prescribe medications 33 ans-WI NatSecAct D0043 Approved for Release 2016 06 10 005856717 Students completing the Interrogation Course are required to Sign an acknowledgment that they have read understand and will comply with the DCI's Interrogation Guidelines 69 In lune 2003 CTC established a debriefing course for Agency substantive experts who are involved in questioning detainees after they have undergone interrogation and have been deemed compliant The debrie ng course was established to train non interrogators to collect actionable intelligence from high value detainees in CIA custody The course is intended to familiarize non-interrogators with key aspects of the Agency interrogation Program to include the Program s goals and legal authorities the DCI Interrogation Guidelines and the roles and res onsibilities of all who interact withahi hyalue detainee DETENTION AND mane GATION OPERATIONS 70 33 Approved for Release 2016 06 10 005856717 - NatSecAct NatSecAct then moved to located in another foreign country Eight individuals were detained and interrogated at including Abu Zubaydah and Al-Nashjri NatSecAct NatSecAct Staf ng and Operatiom b 3 NatSecAct 71 615 CTC initiallyr established to detain and interrogate Abu Zubaydah was operational between December 2002 had no permanent posmons and was staffed witn Lunlponu'y duty TDY of cers Initially Abu Zubaydah s Agency interrogators at included an Of cer who also served as 1 COB and a senior Agency security of cer They were assisted by 3 Nat Se Cmgious security medical and communications personnel detailed to to support the interrogation mission An independent contractor with extensive experience as an interrogation b 1 instructor at the US Air Force SERE School also assisted the team NatSecAct 72 Once the Agency approved the use of HS in August 2002 a second independent contractor Egg with years of SERE experience joined the team This followed a determination by the CIA personnel involved in debriefing that the continuation of the existing methods would not produce the actionable intelligence that the Intelligence Community believed Abu Zubaydah possessed The team was supervised by the COB and supported by the on-site team of security medical and communications personnel NatSecAct 73 fo The responsibility of the COB was to ensure the facility and staff functioned within the authorities that govern the mission In conjunction with those duties the COB was responsible for the overall management and security of the site and the personnel assigned to support ac vities there The COB oversaw interrogations and released operational and intelligence 36b 1 NatSecAct Approved for Release 2016 06 10 7-w Irma MmD0044 TO U Approved for Release 2016 06 10 C05856717 Woman NatSecAct cables and situation reports The COB coordinated activities with the Station and Headquarters and reported to the CTC Chief of Renditions Group 40 NatSecAct 74 The two interrogators at le'd each interrogation of Abu Zubaydah and Al-Nashiri where EITs were used The interrogators conferred with the COB and other team members before each interrogation session evaluations were performed by both Headquarters and on-site Early on in the development of the interrogation Program Agency OMS objected to the use of on-site as interrogators and raised con ict of interest and ethical concerns This was based on a concern that the on site who were administering the EITs participated in the evaluations assessing the Nat Sec Aaffectiveness and impact of the EITs on the detainees 75 5118 The interrogation intelligence requirements for Abu Zubaydah were generally developed at NatSecActHeadquarters by CT Usama Bin Laden UBL Group and refined at and 1 provided input into the rendition and g g Actinterrogation process staff maintained daily dialogue with Headquarters management by cable and secure telephone and officers initiated a video conference with Headquarters to discuss the efficacy of proceeding with EITs 1 Ebg sg NatSecAct 76 'ng Abu Zubaydah was the only detainee at until Abd Al-Rahim Al-Nashiri arrived on 15 November 2002 The interrogation of Al-Nashiri proceeded after 1 received the necessary Headquarters authorizaticm The two NatSecAct 40 13h - lnAug-ust 2002 the group nange became Renditions and Detainm loup indicative of its new for running detention facilities and interrogations For consistency purposes in this Review 01G subsequently refers to this group as RDG m 35 mm NatSecAct 30045 Approved for Release 2016 06 10 005856717 A-where El'ls wand II - II I With told Ii l'v t lac-m - - mic sessim' wage 1e1ir-m cd L11 - rny Approved for Release 2016 06 10 605856717 NatSecAct interrogators began Al Nashiri s interrogation using EITs immediately upon his arrival Al Nashiri provided lead information on other terrorists during his rst day of interrogation On the twelfth day of interrogation the two interrogators administered two applications of the waterboard to Al-Nashiri during two separate interrogation sessions Enhanced interrogation of Al-Nashiri continued throueh 4 December 2002 1 lbilBl NatSecAct Egg NatSeCAgt ideotapes of Interrogations 77 Headquarters had intense interest in 38 NatSechng abreast of all aspects of Abu Zubaydah s interrogation including compliance with the guidance provided to the site relative to the use of EITs Apart from this however and before b 1 the use of EITs the interrogation teams at decided to NatSecActieotape the interrogation sessions One initial purpose was to ensure a record of Abu Zubaydah s medical condition and treatment should he succumb to his wounds and questions arise about the medical care provided to him by CIA Another purpose was to assist in the preparation of the debrie ng reports although the team advised CT Legal that they rarely if ever were used for that purpose There are 92 videotapes 12 of which include applications An OGC attorney reviewed the videotapes in November and December 2002 to ascertain compliance with the August 2002 Do opinion and compare what actually happened with what was reported to Headquarters He reported that there was no deviation from the Do guidance or the written record NatSecAct 78 01G reviewed the videotapes logs and cables in May 2003 OIG identi ed 83 waterboard applications most of which lasted less than 10 seconds OIG also identi ed one instance where a verbally NatSecAct 41 For the purpose of this Review a'vvaterboard application mns m discrete instance in which water was applied for any period of time during a session 36 W NatSecAct Approved for Release 2016 06 10 005856717 z 2 Ea D0046 Elil llt mailman 3m WF gi w- saw-em m interrogators began Al Nashiri s interrogation using immediately upon his arrival Al Nashiri provided lead information on other terrorists durin his first day of interrogation On the twelfth day of interrogation interrogators administered two applications of the waterboard to Al Nashiri during two separate interrogation sessions Enhanced interro iation of Al Nashiri continued through 4 December 2002 - Videotapes of Interrogations 77 Headquarters had intense interest in kee in- abreast of all aspects of Abu Zubayclah s interrogation including compliance with the guidance provided to the site relative to the use of ElTs Apart from this however and before the use of El l s the interrogation teams decided to videotape the interrogation sessions One initial purpose was to ensure a record of Abu Zubaydah s medical condition and treatment should he succumb to his wounds and questions arise about the medical care provided to him by CIA Another purpose was to assist in the preparation of the debrie ng reports although the team advised CTC Legal that they rarely if ever were used for that pin-pose There are 92 videotapes 12 of which include EIT applications An OGC attomey reviewed the Videotapes in November and December 2002 to ascertain compliance with the August 2002 Do opinion and compare what actually happened with what was reported to Headquarters He reported that there Was no deviation from the Do guidance or the written record '78 OIG reviewed the videotapes logs and cables in May 2003 identi ed 83 waterboard most of which lasted less than 10 seconds 4' - 41 For the purpose of this Review a waterboard application constituted each discrete Instance in which water was applied for any period of time during a session 36 Mr Approved for Release 2016 06 10 005656717 NatSecAct threatened Abu Zubaydah by stating If one child dies in America and I nd out you lmew something about it lwill personally cut your mother s throat 2 01G found 11 interrogation videotapes to be 1 blank Two others were blank except for one or two minutes of NatSecAct recording Two others were broken and could not be reviewed OIG compared the videotapes to logs and cables and identi ed a 21-hour period of time which included two waterboard sessions b 1 that was not captured on the videotapes NatSecAct 79 review of the videotapes revealed that the waterboard technique employed at Was different from the technique as described in the Do opinion and used in the SERE training The difference was in the rnarmer in which the detainee s breathing was obstructed At the SERE School and in the Do opinion the subject s air ow is disrupted by the rm application of a damp cloth over the air passages the interrogator applies a small amount of water to the cloth in a controlled manner By contrast the W3 NatseFACtAgency interrogator continuously applied large volumes of water to a cloth that covered the detainee s mouth and nose One of the interrogators acknowledged that the Agency s use of the technique differed from that used in SERE training and explained that the Agency s technique is different because it is for real and is more poignant and convincing NatSecAct lgil i NatSecAct so r51 From December 2002 until September 2003 was used to detain and interrogate 1 eight individuals NatSecAct During this time Headquarters issued the formal DCI Con nement Guidelines the DCI Interrogation Guidelines and the additional draft guidelines speci cally I - aw 12 See discussion in paragraphs 92-93 regrding threats I 37 mm NatSecAct D0047 Approved for Release 2016 06 10 C05856717 I a oun 1 mterrogtion v1 eotapes to blank Two others were blank except for one or two minutes of recording Two others were broken and could not be reviewed 016 compared the videotapes to -logs and cables and identi ed a 21 hour period of time which included two waterboard sessions that was not captured on the videotapes 79 review of the videotapes revealed that the waterboud technique employed at was different from the technique as described in the Do opinion and used in the SERE training The difference was in the manner in which the detainee s breathing was obstructed At the SERE School and in the Doj opinion the Subject s air ow is disrupted by the firm application of a damp cloth over the air passages the interrogator applies a small amount of water to the cloth in a controlled manner By contrast the Agency interrogator continuously applied large volumes of water to a cloth that covered the detainee s mouth and nose One of the interrogators aeknowledged that the Agency s use of the technique differed from that used in SERE training and explained that the Agency s technique is different because it is for real and is more poignant and convincing From December 2002 until During this time Headquarters issued the formal DCI Con nement Guidelines the DCI Interrogation Guidelines and the additional draft guidelines speci cally This document is from the holdings of The National Security Archive Suite 701 Gelman Library The George Washington University 2130 H Street NW Washington D C 20037 Phone 202 994-7000 Fax 202 994-7005 nsarchiv@gwu edu