Page 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SPOKANE SULEIMAN ABDULLAH SALIM et al Plaintiffs No 2 15-cv-286-JLQ v JAMES E MITCHELL and JOHN JESSEN Defendants VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF JOHN RIZZO March 20 2017 10 06 a m Blank Rome LLP 1825 Eye Street Northwest Washington D C 20006 Reported by Lori J Goodin RPR CLR CRR Realtime Systems Administrator Assignment Number 305772 ACLU-RDI p 1 Page 2 1 APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL 2 3 For the Plaintiffs 4 DROR LADIN ESQUIRE 5 HINA SHAMSI ESQUIRE 6 STEVEN M WATT ESQUIRE 7 AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION 8 125 Broad Street 18th Floor 9 New York New York 10 212-284-7303 11 dladin@aclu org 12 10004 -and- 13 AVRAM D FREY ESQUIRE 14 LAWRENCE S LUSTBERG ESQUIRE 15 Gibbons P C 16 One Gateway Center 17 Newark New Jersey 18 973-596-4415 19 afrey@gibbonslaw com 20 llustberg@gibbonslaw com 21 22 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 2 07102 Page 3 1 2 APPEARANCES CONTINUED For the Defendants 3 HENRY F SCHUELKE III ESQUIRE 4 BLANK ROME LLP 5 1825 Eye Street Northwest 6 Washington D C 7 202-772-5815 8 hschuelke@blankrome com 20006 -and9 ANN E QUERNS ESQUIRE 10 JAMES T SMITH ESQUIRE 11 BLANK ROME LLP 12 One Logan Square 13 130 North 18th Street 14 Philadelphia Pennsylvania 15 215-569-5674 16 aquerns@blankrome com 17 smith-jt@blankrome com 19103 18 19 For the Witness 20 ROBERT S BENNETT ESQUIRE 21 HOGAN LOVELLS 22 875 Third Avenue 23 New York New York 24 212-918-3000 25 robert bennett@hoganlovells com ACLU-RDI p 3 10022 Page 4 1 2 APPEARANCES CONTINUED For the Defendant James Mitchell 3 DAVID J UNRUH ESQUIRE 4 BROOKS M HANNER ESQUIRE 5 HOGAN LOVELLS 6 Columbia Square 7 555 Thirteenth Street Northwest 8 Washington D C 9 202-637-5600 20004 10 david unruh@hoganlovells com 11 brooks hanner@hoganlovells com 12 13 For the U S Department of Justice 14 Civil Division 15 16 ANDREW I WARDEN ESQUIRE 17 U S DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE CIVIL DIVISION 18 20 Massachusetts Avenue Northwest 19 Washington D C 20 202-616-5084 21 andrew warden@usdoj gov 22 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 4 20530 Page 5 1 2 APPEARANCES CONTINUED For the United States Government 3 JOSEPH B SWEENEY CHIEF COUNSEL 4 HEATHER WALCOTT ESQUIRE 5 CODY SMITH ESQUIRE 6 CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY 7 OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL LITIGATION DIVISION 8 Washington D C 9 703-874-3123 10 20505 josephs3@ucia gov 11 12 Also Present 13 James Mitchell 14 Megan Beckman CIA Paralegal 15 Franklin Sayers Videographer 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 5 Page 6 1 INDEX OF EXAMINATION 2 3 WITNESS JOHN RIZZO 4 EXAMINATION 5 By Mr Ladin 11 6 By Mr Smith 166 7 By Mr Ladin 209 PAGE 8 9 INDEX OF EXHIBITS 10 USA EXHIBIT 11 Exhibit 1 PAGE CIA's Classification Guidance 12 11 13 DEPOSITION EXHIBITS 14 Exhibit 45 15 Exhibit 45A Rizzo's declaration 1 23 17 16 including all of the exhibits Rizzo's declaration 1 23 17 PAGE 32 166 17 Exhibit 46 Exhibit J to Rizzo's declaration 35 18 Exhibit 47 Excerpt from Rizzo's book 51 19 Exhibit 48 Post-Isolation Phase of 20 21 Abu Zubaydah's Interrogation Exhibit 49 22 51 Office of Professional Responsibility Report 76 88 23 Exhibit 50 Disposition Memorandum 24 Exhibit 51 Inspector General Report 103 25 Exhibit 52 Bellinger letter 121 ACLU-RDI p 6 Page 7 1 INDEX OF EXHIBITS CONTINUED 2 DEPOSITION EXHIBITS 3 Exhibit 53 4 5 Abu Zubaydah's Interrogation Assessment August 9th Exhibit 54 6 7 PAGE 126 Abu Zubaydah's Interrogation Assessment August 14th Exhibit 55 8 129 Abu Zubaydah's Interrogation Assessment August 19th 131 9 Exhibit 56 OLC 2007 Legal Guidance 138 10 Exhibit 57 New York Times Article 152 11 Exhibit 58 Rizzo's comments 160 12 Exhibit 59 Cable 173 13 14 15 PREVIOUSLY MARKED EXHIBITS PRIOR MARKED EXHIBITS FIRST REFERRAL 16 17 22 17 18 33 18 38 63 19 35 73 20 21 81 21 10 83 22 44 92 23 34 107 24 Original Exhibits included with the 25 ACLU-RDI p 7 original transcript Page 8 1 DEPOSITION OF JOHN RIZZO 2 March 20 2017 3 4 THE VIDEOGRAPHER We are now on the 5 record This is the beginning of Videotape 6 Number 1 in the deposition of John Rizzo in 7 the matter of Suleiman Abdullah Salim versus 8 James Elmer Mitchell and John Bruce Jessen in 9 the United States District Court for the 10 Eastern District of Washington at Spokane 11 Case Number 2 15-CV-286-JLQ 12 13 14 Today is Monday March the 20 2017 the time now is 20 -- sorry 10 06 a m This deposition is being taken in 15 the office of Blank Rome LLP 1825 Eye 16 Street Northwest Washington D C 20006 at 17 the Blank Rome LLC firm 18 My name is Frank Sayers the 19 videographer with Magna Legal Services and 20 the court reporter is Lori Goodin also with 21 Magna Legal Services 22 Will counsel and all parties present 23 state their appearance and whom they 24 represent 25 ACLU-RDI p 8 MR BENNETT My name is Bob Page 9 1 Bennett 2 Rizzo 3 I represent the witness John MR LADIN My name is Dror Ladin 4 I represent the plaintiffs 5 MR FREY 6 7 8 9 plaintiffs MR LUSTBERG MS SHAMSI of the plaintiffs 11 MR WATT MR HANNER 14 behalf of Mr Rizzo 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 9 Hina Shamsi on behalf Steven Watt on behalf of the plaintiffs 13 15 Lawrence Lustberg on behalf of plaintiffs 10 12 Avram Frey with MR UNRUH Brooks Hanner on David Unruh on behalf of Mr Rizzo MS QUERNS Ann Querns on behalf of the defendants MR SMITH Jim Smith on behalf of the defendants MR SCHUELKE Hank Schuelke on behalf of the defendants MR MITCHELL James Mitchell I am the defendant MR WARDEN I am Andrew Warden Page 10 1 from the Department of Justice and I 2 represent the United States government in 3 connection with this case 4 United States government I have with me here 5 today Joseph Sweeney Cody Smith Heather 6 Walcott and Meagan Beckman 7 On behalf of the Although the United States 8 government is not a party to this case 9 are here today in order to represent the 10 11 We interests of the United States We understand the questions in this 12 deposition will cover topics related to 13 Mr Rizzo's career as an attorney with the 14 Central Intelligence Agency 15 Given the sensitive nature of the 16 positions Mr Rizzo held while with the CIA 17 and the information he acquired while in 18 those positions we are here today to protect 19 against the unauthorized disclosure of the 20 classified protected or privileged 21 government information 22 To guide the parties in the 23 deposition we provided the parties with 24 classification guidance from the CIA which 25 we premarked as Exhibit 1 ACLU-RDI p 10 Page 11 1 2 THE VIDEOGRAPHER Okay Will the court reporter please swear in the witness 3 JOHN RIZZO 4 a witness called for examination having been 5 first duly sworn was examined and testified as 6 follows 7 United States Exhibit Number 1 8 premarked for identification 9 MR WARDEN What I have disclosed 10 is marked as Exhibit 1 classification 11 guidance from the Central Intelligence Agency 12 that provides a list of categories of 13 information about the CIA's detention and 14 interrogation program that remains 15 classified and a list of categories of 16 information that is now unclassified 17 The government would issue a 18 continuing instruction at the outset of this 19 deposition that in response to any questions 20 the government instructs the witness 21 Mr Rizzo not to answer with reference to 22 any of the information identified as 23 classified in the guidance 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 11 And we reserve the right to object to any questions posed to Mr Rizzo Page 12 1 consistent with his nondisclosure agreements 2 with the government and instruct Mr Rizzo 3 not to answer any questions that would tend 4 to call for the disclosure of classified 5 protected or privileged government 6 information 7 MR SMITH Just as a point of 8 order Mr Warden in the past with these 9 depositions we had an understanding that if 10 the government had any concern about the 11 question that was asked and the anticipated 12 answer to just simply raise your hand 13 will signal to the witness that the 14 government may have a concern and until you 15 tell us how you want to proceed the room 16 will be quiet 17 18 MR WARDEN Mr Smith 19 21 We appreciate that Thank you MR SMITH 20 Great EXAMINATION BY MR LADIN 22 Q All right 23 A Good morning 24 Q My name is Dror Ladin 25 ACLU-RDI p 12 That attorney with the ACLU Good morning Mr Rizzo I am an Here with me are my Page 13 1 colleagues Mr Frey Mr Lustberg Ms Shamsi 2 and Mr Watt 3 the matter Salim v Mitchell 4 And we represent the plaintiffs in You are represented by counsel 5 today And I'm sure you have been prepared but 6 just so we are clear I'm going to go through 7 some of the instructions on the deposition 8 Have you ever been deposed before 9 A No not at deposition no 10 Q Okay As you see we have a 11 stenographer here and she will transcribe 12 everything that is said today 13 We also have a videographer who 14 will be recording your testimony 15 goes to trial in the future it is possible that 16 your testimony could be introduced through the 17 transcript or video 18 If this case Do you understand that 19 A Yes 20 Q And I'm going to be asking you 21 questions today 22 responses 23 you should treat it just as if you were 24 testifying in court 25 that would apply even though we are in a less ACLU-RDI p 13 And you will be providing Your responses are under oath and It is the same solemn oath Page 14 1 formal setting 2 Do you understand 3 A Yes 4 Q Thank you Mr Bennett will be 5 defending you 6 will state those 7 until his objection is finished before you 8 respond 9 And if he has any objections he And if he does please wait Also please wait until I'm finished 10 asking questions before you respond 11 extend the same courtesy to you 12 that we not speak over one another 13 I will It is important If you don't understand a question 14 or any part of a question please ask me to 15 rephrase and I will be glad to do so 16 17 If you do answer a question I will assume you understood it Is that fair 18 A That is fair 19 Q I will ask you to verbalize your 20 answers just because nods of the head or 21 gestures won't show up on the transcript 22 Are you on any drugs or medications 23 or anything that would impair your ability to 24 testify truthfully today 25 ACLU-RDI p 14 A No Page 15 1 Q All right And understand that you 2 can take a break at any time 3 and we will halt it 4 of me before we begin Do you have any questions 5 A No 6 Q All right 7 8 So you had a deposition scheduled in January in this case correct 9 A 10 11 Just let me know I don't remember MR BENNETT You've answered it BY MR LADIN 12 Q All right Do you remember having a 13 deposition scheduled in this case at some point 14 before today 15 A Oh before today 16 Q Yes 17 A It was scheduled two weeks ago 18 Q And before that time were you asked 19 to provide a declaration for the defendants in 20 this case 21 A Oh yes yes 22 Q How did that declaration come about 23 A Well I worked with my attorneys 24 here 25 defendants saw the declaration ACLU-RDI p 15 They I believe at that point the So I worked Page 16 1 with my attorneys in putting together a 2 declaration that covered the subject matters the 3 defendants were interested in 4 5 Q And was there some offer that you would get anything in return for this declaration 6 A No 7 Q Did you understand that if you gave 8 No Not as such no the declaration you might not need to be deposed 9 A Yes 10 Q And did you read every paragraph of 11 the declaration 12 A Yes 13 Q Is every paragraph in that 14 declaration truthful 15 A Yes 16 Q Did you omit anything from the 17 declaration at the request of the defendants 18 A Not that I recall no 19 Q Okay 20 So you were an attorney at the CIA for how many years 21 A Thirty-four 22 Q Thirty-four years 23 did you maintain a law license 24 A Yes 25 Q Do you have one now ACLU-RDI p 16 And at that time Page 17 1 A Yes 2 Q Did you ever practice criminal law 3 A No 4 Q And you I think you stated you 5 hadn't had any occasion to look at for example 6 the criminal code's definition of torture before 7 2001 or 2002 is that correct 8 A Before 2002 yes 9 Q Had you ever studied the Geneva 10 Convention prior to 2002 11 A Not really no 12 Q That is not really something that 13 was looked at a lot at the CIA at the time 14 right 15 A No no 16 Q The CIA didn't really deal with 17 captivity or the law that was associated with it 18 before 2002 19 MR BENNETT Well excuse me 20 say the CIA 21 So could you be more specific 22 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 17 You That is a big organization MR LADIN Sure BY MR LADIN Q In your experience in the -- was it the Office of General Counsel Page 18 1 A For my career 2 Q Yes 3 A Yes I spent one year in the Office 4 of Inspector General and two years in the Office 5 of Congressional Affairs But other than that my entire 6 7 8 9 10 career was in the Office of General Counsel yes Q And in that office to the best of your knowledge during your time there no one dealt prior to 2002 with questions of captivity 11 A No 12 Q What about any training in 13 psychology Did you ever study psychology 14 A No 15 Q Okay 16 Certainly not in my time there And you've never studied posttraumatic stress disorder 17 A No 18 Q So how did you come to know that 19 the CIA was considering the use of an enhanced 20 interrogation program 21 A Well in early 2002 I say early 22 late March early April the kind of some people 23 from the Counter Terrorism Center came to my 24 office and this was a few months after the 25 capture of the CIA capture of Abu Zubaydah the ACLU-RDI p 18 Page 19 1 first high value EKD that was captured 2 They came to my office with a over 3 a briefing and told me about some proposed 4 interrogation techniques new ones that were 5 being contemplated 6 7 Q that Jose Rodriguez and James Mitchell 8 9 And when you say some people was A I don't -- no I don't believe so These were people -- well Jose I guess was 10 Chief Counter Terrorism Center 11 sure he wasn't there 12 Mr Mitchell was there 13 Q I'm sure I'm And I don't believe Did there come a time when you did 14 meet with Jose Rodriguez and Jim Mitchell about 15 the EITs 16 A Yes there came a time 17 Q Do you remember roughly when that A Well I met with Jose almost 18 19 Yes was 20 immediately after first being told about these 21 proposed techniques and why the people in the CTC 22 thought they were necessary 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 19 I don't recall meeting Mr Mitchell for some months after that actually Q Had the people in CTC informed you Page 20 1 of the origin of the techniques they were 2 considering 3 A We are talking about 15 years ago 4 But I believe in that initial briefing there was 5 some reference made to them being based on the 6 SERE techniques which also I had no prior 7 knowledge of so -- 8 9 Q And what did you understand or what do you now understand SERE training to be 10 A Well it is survival -- 11 Q Yes we don't need the acronym 12 A But it is training that special 13 forces Navy officers take to prepare them for 14 possible capture by terrorists or other 15 extra-national organizations 16 Q And what did you understand at the 17 time about the use of SERE techniques in 18 training 19 A 20 21 Well that they had been a staple of these training programs for some period of time Q And did you understand that the 22 techniques that you were considering were 23 identical to the techniques that were used in 24 SERE training 25 ACLU-RDI p 20 A No my recollection is that I was Page 21 1 told that these were based on the SERE training 2 techniques but there was some variation 3 4 5 Q And when did you first meet Dr Mitchell A Well to the best of my recollection 6 I met the Dr Mitchell and Dr Jessen several 7 months later 8 9 Again sorry to go back in time now but I would say maybe six seven 10 eight months later somewhere along those 11 lines 12 13 Q So you are saying after the techniques had already been used 14 A Uh-huh 15 Q So you don't -- 16 A Yes 17 Q -- you don't recall a meeting with 18 George Tenet and Jose Rodriguez in which James 19 Mitchell presented the techniques 20 A No I don't recall that 21 Q Okay Did you know that neither 22 Mitchell nor Jessen had ever conducted an 23 interrogation prior to the instigation of Abu 24 Zubaydah 25 A ACLU-RDI p 21 Did I know that Page 22 1 Q At the time yes 2 A No 3 Q Would it have made any difference to A No 4 you 5 I mean I wasn't in a position 6 to judge their qualifications and experience 7 was the legal advisor 8 9 Q I And they were presented to you as experts on interrogation 10 A I don't know if the word experts 11 was used 12 didn't -- I don't recall meeting any of them for 13 several months But they certainly -- again I 14 But I believe the CTC presenters 15 who presented the techniques said that the that 16 these were experienced psychologists in this 17 area 18 Q All right I'm going to show you a 19 document that has previously been marked 20 Exhibit 17 21 Whereupon previously marked 22 Exhibit 17 first referral 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 22 THE WITNESS Okay BY MR LADIN Q Are these the enhanced interrogation Page 23 1 techniques that were presented to you 2 MR SMITH 3 THE WITNESS Do I answer 4 MR BENNETT Yes you can answer 5 THE WITNESS They appear to be some 6 7 of them Objection Not all of them BY MR LADIN 8 Q So which ones -- 9 A At least the part that isn't 10 redacted 11 Q So this lists 12 techniques We 12 can just go through them and you can tell me 13 whether those are different than the 14 techniques -- 15 A You know how many pages is this 16 Because I've only got two and it starts in the 17 middle of a sentence 18 Q That is certainly odd 19 A Am I missing something 20 Q Is that how -- that is not how my 21 version looks 22 mine 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 23 A Well here why don't you use Oh I'm sorry I'm sorry My mistake -- no MR BENNETT They just didn't copy Page 24 1 the back page here 2 3 4 THE WITNESS Okay Here we go BY MR LADIN 5 6 All right Q I see So now it makes sense why you said techniques were missing 7 Well looking at this now are these 8 12 techniques the techniques that were presented 9 to you 10 MR SMITH 11 MR BENNETT Go ahead 12 THE WITNESS Yes they appear to 13 14 15 Objection be BY MR LADIN Q Okay You said in your book that 16 some of the techniques sounded sadistic and 17 terrifying to you 18 19 20 Do you stand by that characterization A At the time they were described to 21 me for the first time that was my immediate 22 reaction 23 No I mean as I got to know more 24 about the way the techniques were to be 25 administered and controlled no I wouldn't use ACLU-RDI p 24 Page 25 1 those adjectives any longer 2 Q How would you describe them now 3 A Very tough and very harsh some of 5 Q Which ones are those 6 A Which ones I think now are that or 4 7 them which ones did I think at the time 8 Q Why don't you tell me both 9 A Well at the time -- when I say at 10 the time at the time these proposed techniques 11 were first presented to me the waterboard and 12 the mock burial struck me as the harshest 13 of the others far less so 14 Some And so putting forth yes moving 15 forth to the present or at least at the time 16 while I was still at the agency I still consider 17 waterboarding a very harsh technique 18 MR SMITH Mr Rizzo could I ask 19 if you could keep your voice up so we could 20 hear you down here 21 THE WITNESS 22 MR SMITH 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 25 Oh I'm sorry Thank you BY MR LADIN Q So Dr Mitchell recalls a meeting that I completely understand if you don't recall Page 26 1 but he says that you and the Director Tenet were 2 very interested in the fact that the techniques 3 that you were discussing had been used on 4 thousands of U S military personnel over the 5 years 6 7 Was that important to your legal analysis of these techniques 8 MR SMITH Objection 9 MR BENNETT Go ahead 10 THE WITNESS Well the fact that 11 they had been employed previously sure that 12 had an impact on the way I viewed them from a 13 potential legal standpoint 14 BY MR LADIN 15 Q And what was your understanding in 16 the ways the techniques differed from their use 17 in training 18 19 20 A Oh I can't remember that I can't Q So you don't remember you don't recall 21 remember what you were told about how the 22 techniques compared to their use in SERE 23 training 24 A No 25 Q Did Mitchell or Jessen ever tell you ACLU-RDI p 26 Not specifically Page 27 1 that SERE techniques were based on techniques 2 used by German Japanese Korean and North 3 Vietnamese militaries in past conflicts 4 A Not that I recall no 5 Q Were you ever told by Mitchell or 6 Jessen that SERE was based on techniques that had 7 been used to extract false confessions from 8 American prisoners of war 9 A No 10 Q Was that something that you were 11 independently aware of 12 A Was what the false confessions 13 Q That that SERE training was based on 14 interrogation programs that had extracted false 15 confessions from American prisoners of war 16 17 A I subsequently learned of those allegations 18 But at the time I don't recall 19 doctors Mitchell or Jessen or actually anyone in 20 the CTC telling me that 21 Q And was your understanding that 22 someone in CTC aside from Mitchell or Jessen 23 had experience in the SERE program 24 A No I don't recall that 25 Q So after the techniques were ACLU-RDI p 27 Page 28 1 presented to you did you have an opinion as to 2 their legality 3 A Well as I say I thought having 4 had no previous experience with the torture 5 statute I had less of a rudimentary 6 understanding of what the legal lines were 7 But hearing about the waterboard 8 which I had never heard of before and the mock 9 burial technique I thought whatever the legal 10 line was these two in particular were close 11 to it 12 13 14 Q And what did you do to determine whether they were in fact legal A Well I mean keep in mind the time 15 was of the essence Then the our CTC people 16 were convinced that Abu Zubaydah was holding back 17 information 18 coercive interrogation techniques 19 know this was a few months after 9 11 that you 20 know there was a great sense of fear and threat 21 that another major attack was coming on the 22 homeland That he was not responding to less And that you 23 So I decided rather than conduct a 24 legal analysis by our office that I would refer 25 the matter immediately to the Office of Legal ACLU-RDI p 28 Page 29 1 Counsel at the Department of Justice 2 Q And were you aware that during this 3 period in which you were told that there was a 4 great deal of urgency to question Abu Zubaydah 5 Abu Zubaydah was in fact not questioned for over 6 a month 7 MR BENNETT I might object to the 8 form of the question because you assume 9 things that are not not really are you 10 aware that 11 I don't mind you asking him if he 12 knew of something 13 But your questions seem to be 14 predicated on something as an established 15 fact 16 MR LADIN 17 MR BENNETT 18 MR LADIN 20 MR BENNETT Q ACLU-RDI p 29 -- your questions Have you heard of an isolation phase in Abu Zubaydah's interrogation 24 25 Sure BY MR LADIN 22 23 So I would appreciate it if you could reword your objections -- 19 21 Sure A yes I have heard of an isolation phase Page 30 1 2 Q Do you know whether Abu Zubaydah was asked any questions during the isolation phase 3 A Again do I know 4 Q Do you know now 5 A Do I know now Yes I've come to 6 learn that there was a period of time where he 7 was not asked questions 8 Q And at the time did you know that 9 A At the very beginning that the 10 techniques were being described to me at that 11 point in time 12 Q At the time when you were seeking 13 the Department of Justice's opinion on the 14 techniques 15 A No I don't believe so 16 Q Do you recall when you became aware 17 of the fact that he wasn't being questioned 18 during that period 19 20 A I believe it was some months later It was a while 21 Q So what was the extent of the 22 internal CIA process to determine the legality of 23 the techniques before you turned the matter over 24 to OLC 25 ACLU-RDI p 30 A I asked our lawyers in the Counter Page 31 1 Terrorism Center to see what they could come up 2 with in terms of initial legal precedents 3 legislative history about the torture statute 4 what they could find in the legal literature And so they did some of that 5 6 7 8 9 10 Q that they reached A 13 No I wasn't -- again I was determined from the beginning to seek definitive word from the Office of Legal Counsel As I recall this was more of a 11 12 And do you remember any conclusion legal research not a you know legal conclusion Q So as far as you were concerned 14 was the legality of the techniques an open 15 question when you referred the matter to the 16 Office of Legal Counsel 17 A Yes 18 Q Now one aspect of that referral was 19 that the Office of Legal Counsel came back to 20 your office with requests for further 21 information Is that correct 22 A That is correct 23 Q And in your declaration you point 24 to a particular OTS memo that you provided to OLC 25 to ensure that the CIA was not overselling that ACLU-RDI p 31 Page 32 1 SERE was identical or the certainty that there 2 would be no harm 3 sure -- 4 5 MR BENNETT a statement 6 7 8 9 Is that -- so just to make Is that a question or You made a statement MR LADIN I did you are right Let me rephrase BY MR LADIN Q And just to sort of smooth this 10 along I'm just going to give you a copy of your 11 declaration 12 this one thankfully is copied on both sides 13 14 MR LADIN Do you know Please mark this as Exhibit 45 18 Exhibit Number 45 19 21 So Ms Court Reporter What number are we up to 17 20 And could you please mark this exhibit 15 16 So we will mark that exhibit marked for identification BY MR LADIN Q So I'm going to ask you about 22 Paragraphs 38 and 39 which are on Page 6 and 7 23 of your declaration 24 A Okay 25 Q So you see the statement there that ACLU-RDI p 32 Page 33 1 you say you provided to the Office of Legal 2 Counsel to ensure that the CIA was not 3 overselling the significance of the EITs used 4 during SERE training 5 MR BENNETT Which paragraph are 7 THE WITNESS Uh-huh correct 8 MR LADIN 6 9 10 you That is Paragraph 39 BY MR LADIN Q And that was part of a back and 11 forth with OLC in which you provided them with 12 information to allow them to assess legality is 13 that correct 14 A That's correct 15 Q I would like to show you a document 16 that has been previously marked Exhibit 17 Number 18 18 Whereupon previously marked 19 Exhibit 18 first referral 20 MR BENNETT Which paragraph does 21 that refer to 22 outside the declaration 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 33 Do you know MR LADIN Or is it Sorry I didn't understand the question MR BENNETT Well is this an Page 34 1 exhibit to his declaration 2 MR LADIN 3 exhibit to your declaration 4 5 6 MR BENNETT BY MR LADIN Q It has previously been marked in a 8 different deposition 9 believe of your declaration 15 16 If it was I apologize MR BENNETT That is all right BY MR LADIN 13 14 At least that is what I It may -- I don't believe this was part 11 12 Okay thank you Thank you 7 10 No this was not an Q There is very similar text in A Let me read this because I don't this -- believe that I've seen this before 17 Q Sure 18 A Okay 19 Q So this appears to be a cable in 20 which recommendations and responses to questions 21 are being provided by IC SERE psychologists is 22 that right 23 A It appears to be 24 Q And the IC SERE psychologists 25 ACLU-RDI p 34 those are Mitchell and Jessen correct Page 35 1 A Yes I assume so 2 MR BENNETT Well don't assume 3 THE WITNESS Okay 4 MR BENNETT He is entitled to full 5 6 I don't know and complete answers but not assumptions BY MR LADIN 7 Q Do you know of any other independent 8 contractor SERE psychologists who were involved 9 in the Abu Zubaydah interrogation 10 A Not that I recall 11 Q So here it says the paragraph that 12 begins on Page 1 once it is not redacted 13 appears to be the same as the OTS memo that you 14 provided to the Department of Justice is that 15 right 16 MR SMITH 17 THE WITNESS 18 19 20 21 Objection I would need to look at the OTS memo to compare BY MR LADIN Q Sure All right I won't ask you to do that 22 But what I do want to ask you is 23 was there as far as you were aware a back and 24 forth process in which feedback was solicited 25 from the IC SERE psychologists about the safety ACLU-RDI p 35 Page 36 1 2 3 4 and necessity of different techniques A Yes well there -- yes there was a iterative process back and forth yes Q And that process resulted in 5 feedback like the feedback presented here in 6 Paragraphs 4 5 and 6 that is identified as IC 7 SERE psychologists' feedback 8 MR SMITH 9 THE WITNESS Objection I can't say I'm just 10 again reading this for the first time so I 11 can't -- 12 13 16 You have answered the THE WITNESS Okay question 14 15 MR BENNETT BY MR LADIN Q Do you remember any aspects of the 17 iterative process by which information was 18 communicated to the Office of Legal Counsel in 19 their evaluation of the techniques 20 21 22 A I'm sorry you have to clarify In the aspects of the iterative Q Sure I believe you said there was 23 an iterative process in which OLC would ask CIA 24 for further information 25 ACLU-RDI p 36 A Right Page 37 1 Q Would that flow through your office 2 A It would -- well it certainly 3 would flow -- some of it flowed to me from OLC 4 directly 5 As I recall other times OLC people 6 would call the lawyers in CTC and I wouldn't be 7 directly involved in that 8 9 Q And if information flowed from CTC in response to DOJ's requests would that 10 response go through you or might it go -- would 11 that response go through you 12 A As I recall a lot of it did but I 13 can't say all of it I mean there are times I 14 weren't there -- I wasn't there or I was 15 involved in other things 16 So I can't say all of it 17 MR BENNETT Your hand 18 THE WITNESS Okay 19 20 21 22 BY MR LADIN Q And you've said you've not seen this cable before A I can't say I've never seen it I 23 just haven't seen it in a long time if I've seen 24 it at all 25 ACLU-RDI p 37 Q So to be clear when you say that Page 38 1 Drs Mitchell and Jessen were not involved -- let 2 me just get to exactly what you said 3 4 So just to return to your declaration 5 6 MR BENNETT talking about now 7 8 9 10 Which paragraph are we MR LADIN Sure BY MR LADIN Q So take Paragraph 22 of your declaration on Page 4 11 A Okay 12 Q So when you say To my knowledge 13 Drs Mitchell and Jessen had no role in OLC's 14 assessment of these techniques' legality that 15 is not incorporating for example your review of 16 the cable you've just looked at is that correct 17 A No I mean I -- Drs Mitchell and 18 Jessen to my knowledge had no role in the OLC's 19 assessment 20 The only people who had 21 communications back and forth with OLC were 22 either myself or the to my knowledge the CTC 23 attorneys 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 38 So that is what I was trying to get at there Page 39 1 Q So is what you mean that as far as 2 you know Drs Mitchell and Jessen didn't directly 3 speak with OLC 4 A As far as I know 5 Q But you are not saying that they 6 did not provide information that was considered 7 by OLC 8 9 10 11 A remember what they provided and what they didn't Q Let's look at I think this MR BENNETT Here let's go to J here 14 15 Sure was Exhibit J to your declaration 12 13 At this point in time I can't MR LADIN Court Reporter could you please mark this as 46 16 Exhibit Number 46 17 marked for identification 18 MR BENNETT Take that book 19 is your declaration and your exhibits 20 are talking about J 21 22 23 We BY MR LADIN Q And what I'm going to ask you about is on the page marked Bates 1763 24 A Okay 25 Q So here it appears to say in ACLU-RDI p 39 That Page 40 1 Paragraph 7 that the Office of Legal Counsel 2 advised that the statute would not prohibit the 3 methods proposed by the interrogation team in 4 light of the specific facts and circumstances of 5 the interrogation process 6 7 8 9 A I'm sorry Can you just tell me where on that page you are reading from Q Paragraph 7 Sure It is in the middle It is And it -- well take your time 10 A So the question is 11 Q Sure So it says The legal 12 conclusion turns upon the following factors 13 And then it lists a series of factors correct 14 A Correct 15 Q And if you look at the bottom 16 paragraph it says We understand from OTS and 17 there is something redacted OMS and the SERE 18 psychologists on the interrogation team that the 19 procedures described above should not repeat 20 not produce severe mental or physical pain and 21 suffering 22 Do you see that 23 A Yes 24 Q And so when they say we understand 25 ACLU-RDI p 40 from the SERE psychologists on the interrogation Page 41 1 2 team that is Drs Mitchell and Jessen correct A 3 4 5 Again I don't know specifically MR BENNETT You answered it BY MR LADIN Q Okay And just before we are done 6 it also says Nor would they be expected to 7 produce prolonged mental harm continuing from a 8 period of months or years such as the creation 9 of persistent posttraumatic stress disorder 10 Do you see that 11 A I do yes 12 Q So this says that the Office of 13 Legal Counsel considered it important in their 14 determination as to legality feedback that they 15 received about whether these techniques would 16 cause posttraumatic stress disorder 17 MR BENNETT Well I -- look I 18 object because the document speaks for 19 itself 20 MR LADIN 21 MR BENNETT Okay so -- 22 THE WITNESS That is what it says 23 MR BENNETT He says he doesn't 24 remember seeing this 25 THE WITNESS ACLU-RDI p 41 I understand So your question is Page 42 1 BY MR LADIN 2 3 Q So my question is I -- let me phrase it correctly 4 You don't have specific knowledge 5 that Mitchell and Jessen did not provide their 6 views on the likelihood that posttraumatic stress 7 disorder would result to the Office of Legal 8 Counsel do you 9 A 10 That is a double negative I do not -- I'm sorry 11 Q You don't have specific knowledge -- 12 A Right 13 Q -- that Mitchell and Jessen did not 14 provide their views on the likelihood of PTSD to 15 the Office of Legal Counsel 16 17 A I do not have specific knowledge of Q And when you say in Paragraph 22 of that 18 19 your declaration that Mitchell and Jessen were 20 not involved in OLC's assessment of the legality 21 of the techniques that is because you don't 22 specifically recall Mitchell and Jessen speaking 23 to OLC 24 A No -- I mean yes 25 Q Sorry ACLU-RDI p 42 Page 43 1 2 3 A I don't recall I don't recall that ever happening no Q Okay But you don't have a specific 4 recollection that information provided by 5 Mitchell and Jessen was not considered by OLC 6 A No 7 Q Okay 8 9 Thank you MR LADIN Let's take a break for just a moment if that is all right 10 THE WITNESS 11 THE VIDEOGRAPHER 12 All right The time is 10 50 a m we are going off the record 13 Recess taken -- 10 50 a m 14 After recess -- 10 57 a m 15 THE VIDEOGRAPHER 16 17 18 10 57 a m on the record BY MR LADIN Q So I just want to return to the 19 cable we have been discussing that was Exhibit J 20 to your declaration 21 A Right 22 Q So you describe that as a 23 conversion of the August 1 2002 Bybee memo in 24 Paragraph 44 of your declaration -- 25 ACLU-RDI p 43 A Yes Page 44 1 2 3 Q black site identified as Green A 4 5 6 -- that you had sent to Green the Correct MR BENNETT Keep your voice up please BY MR LADIN 7 Q So you have seen this cable before 8 A I'm sure I did 9 Q Well who drafted this paragraph of 10 your declaration 11 A I did 12 Q And in doing so did you examine 13 the cable at Exhibit J 14 A Yes 15 Q So turning to that cable I would 16 just like to walk through it 17 were looking at stamped Bates 1763 the cable you 18 had sent to the black site that refers to SERE 19 psychologists on the interrogation team do you 20 know who those SERE psychologists are 21 MR BENNETT 22 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 44 On the page we Then or now BY MR LADIN Q Do you now know who those SERE psychologists are A I believe so yes Page 45 1 Q And is that Drs Mitchell and 3 A Yes 4 Q So in this cable is there an 2 Jessen 5 indication that Drs Mitchell and Jessen made a 6 representation about whether these techniques 7 could cause severe mental or physical pain or 8 suffering 9 MR BENNETT I'm going to object on 10 the basis that the document speaks for 11 itself 12 so -- 13 14 MR LADIN MR BENNETT 19 20 I just Go ahead over my objection go ahead 17 18 I understand want to get his take on the document 15 16 He has identified it as an exhibit THE WITNESS I'm sorry could you -BY MR LADIN Q Sure In this document that you had 21 sent to the black site does it indicate that the 22 SERE psychologists on the interrogation team 23 which means Mitchell and Jessen gave an 24 indication of whether their techniques would 25 produce severe mental or physical pain or ACLU-RDI p 45 Page 46 1 suffering 2 3 MR BENNETT And where are you referring to 4 MR SMITH Objection 5 MR LADIN So that is the bottom 6 paragraph 7 MR BENNETT 8 Go ahead 9 THE WITNESS 10 11 12 again Objection I'm just reading it Yes that is what it says yes BY MR LADIN Q Okay And with that in mind do 13 you still maintain that Mitchell and Jessen had 14 no role in the OLC's consideration of the 15 legality of the techniques 16 17 MR SMITH Objection You can answer 18 THE WITNESS Well as I indicated 19 earlier what I meant to say in that 20 paragraph that I was trying to get across is 21 that they had no to my knowledge they had 22 no interactions with the OLC during the 23 course of the OLC deliberation 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 46 BY MR LADIN Q But in fact they did provide Page 47 1 information that OLC considered in assessing the 2 legality of the techniques 3 A Appears to be the case yes 4 Q Now when you initiated the process 5 with OLC to review the legality of the 6 techniques did you ask for evaluations of all of 7 the techniques that Mitchell and Jessen 8 recommended 9 A Yes all of the 12 original 10 techniques yes asked for a collective 11 evaluation 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Q And did you ask for the evaluation of any other techniques A No Just the ones that the 12 that had become part of the record Q And these 12 techniques were recommended by Mitchell and Jessen A Well they were recommended by CTC management Q And as far as you know was someone 21 besides Mitchell and Jessen involved in selecting 22 the techniques 23 MR SMITH 24 THE WITNESS 25 ACLU-RDI p 47 Objection Yes I think my recollection was there were a number of Page 48 1 2 3 people in CTC involved in that process BY MR LADIN Q Now once you turned over the 4 assessment process to OLC would it be correct to 5 say that you wanted legal cover from OLC 6 7 MR BENNETT object 8 9 Well I'm going to What do you mean by cover MR LADIN I'm actually trying to use a term from your book So maybe it is 10 just easiest if we if we distribute those 11 pages 12 MR BENNETT But I want to be sure 13 his use of the term and yours is the same 14 That is my concern 15 MR LADIN I appreciate that And 16 I think the best way will probably be to have 17 Mr Rizzo explain it 18 19 MR HANNER pages 20 21 MR LADIN MR HANNER 23 MR LADIN 25 ACLU-RDI p 48 Sure It is on Page 188 22 24 Could you tell us which Thank you And it is the paragraph at the middle of the page MR BENNETT Beginning with I Page 49 1 2 arrived at the meeting BY MR LADIN 3 Q 4 Page 188 5 A 188 6 Q Yes 7 A I'm sorry 8 This looks familiar So what paragraph are we talking to about here 9 10 No it says Above all I on Q So the one that begins Above A Okay I see okay all 11 Yes Above all 12 I wanted a written OLC opinion in order to give 13 the agency for lack of a better term legal 14 cover 15 Q So what do you mean by that 16 A The well I wanted to the only 17 reason I went to OLC was to get the agency 18 definitive categorical legal guidance either 19 that the techniques did not violate the torture 20 statute or if any of them did 21 Because I wanted the CIA my 22 clients to be protected and be covered if you 23 will down the road if there were any any 24 political retribution because of either course 25 that the CIA was going to take either to proceed ACLU-RDI p 49 Page 50 1 2 3 with the program or scrub it before it began Q And would you say that you were agnostic as to the outcome of OLC's process 4 MR BENNETT 5 the word agnostic 6 means in terms of -- 7 8 9 MR LADIN I'm going to object to I don't know what that Sure BY MR LADIN Q Did you have a preference -- you are 10 suggesting or if I'm understanding you 11 correctly you are saying you gave the process 12 over to OLC 13 14 15 Did you have a preferred outcome in terms of their decision A No not really I just wanted 16 something definitive in writing one way or the 17 other so the agency would have that 18 Q And did you have the sense that 19 others at the agency also had no particular view 20 one way or the other as to what the outcome of 21 that process should be 22 A Well I think it is fair to say that 23 the people in the CTC thought these techniques 24 were absolutely necessary and vital 25 ACLU-RDI p 50 So I'm sure they wanted an outcome Page 51 1 that would that would come out in favor of these 2 things being able to be carried out lawfully 3 Q 4 5 MR LADIN MR LADIN to mark your book 8 Oh I believe we forgot I'm sorry Thank you 9 Exhibit Number 47 10 marked for identification 11 12 Let's mark this as I think Exhibit 47 please 6 7 Let's take a look at Bates 1160 MR BENNETT MR LADIN 14 MR BENNETT 15 MR LADIN 21 Right Sorry let's mark the Exhibit Number 48 18 20 Yes book as 47 or the book excerpt as 47 17 19 So we are on 48 then 13 16 Okay marked for identification BY MR LADIN Q Yes What I'm going to ask you about is Paragraph 7 22 A Right 23 Q So here it says that a formal 24 declination of prosecution might be sought for 25 any specific methods which the team believes ACLU-RDI p 51 Page 52 1 would be effective but which might not otherwise 2 be permissible 3 Do you remember being involved in 4 a process seeking a formal declination of 5 prosecution 6 A You mean in the context of this do 7 I remember this being part of this cable or just 8 part of a process to seek declination 9 10 Q Well let's start with the cable Have you seen this cable before 11 A Ever I I can't remember 12 Q Do you remember CTC legal being 13 involved in a back and forth with the black site 14 that was considering different interrogation 15 strategies for Abu Zubaydah 16 17 18 19 A I'm generally aware of it I'm generally aware of that Q Were you consulted during that process 20 A I'm sure I was 21 Q And do you remember the guidance 22 being given that the interrogation team should 23 rule out nothing whatsoever that they believed 24 may be effective but instead they should come on 25 back to CTC legal which will get them the ACLU-RDI p 52 Page 53 1 approvals 2 A No I don't remember that 3 Q Do you remember that there was a 4 suggestion made that a formal declination of 5 prosecution could be used to provide further 6 legal cover for the interrogation team 7 A Well what I remember is in one of 8 my meetings with the Justice Department and the 9 OLC leading up to this opinion I posed the 10 question whether declination of prosecution was 11 feasible 12 And the assistant Attorney General 13 Criminal Division Michael Chertoff immediately 14 told me it was not 15 that 16 17 Q And that was the end of Had you ever sought a formal declination of prosecution prior to that 18 A No 19 Q Have you ever sought one 20 subsequently 21 A No 22 Q So do you agree it is a fairly 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 53 extraordinary thing to seek MR BENNETT of the question I object to the form The word extraordinary Page 54 1 means different things to different people 2 THE WITNESS Should I answer 3 MR BENNETT Go ahead 4 objection 5 THE WITNESS 6 7 Well it was extraordinary times BY MR LADIN 8 9 Over my Q Did Chertoff tell you why he would not provide a declination of prosecution 10 A He said they never do that 11 Q And it was your idea to seek it from A Well it was my idea to ask about 12 him 13 14 the possibility yes 15 Q And was that because there was a 16 possibility that this might transgress criminal 17 law 18 A No I mean I was just asking 19 because I wanted to secure maximum legal 20 protection for the agency in any feasible and 21 legitimate form 22 Q 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 54 And you don't read -- let me take that back Now a declination of prosecution is a request that even if a criminal law is Page 55 1 violated the Justice Department not prosecute 2 is that correct 3 A That was my understanding yes 4 Q So if no criminal law is violated 5 the declination of prosecution would not serve 6 any particular function 7 A That is correct 8 Q Eventually OLC came back and 9 10 authorized all of the Mitchell and Jessen techniques except for mock burial right 11 A Correct 12 Q Did you have an understanding as to 13 14 why mock burial was being treated differently A Well my understanding was several 15 days prior to the issuance of the OLC memo of 16 August 1 2002 John Yoo Y-O-O called me to say 17 that they were having I believe he said a 18 difficulty getting there in terms of the torture 19 statute on mock burial 20 consider it absolutely necessary to have because 21 it was -- he said it might slow down the rest of 22 the completion of the memo OLC memo 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 55 Q And was it did we When you say difficulty getting there what do you mean A Well I didn't say it He did I'm Page 56 1 just quoting to you what he said to me 2 3 Q So what did you understand him to A Well I understood him to mean that mean 4 5 they were not sure legally that they could 6 authorize justify the use of that particular 7 technique 8 9 Q And did they say we won't approve it or did they say it might take more time 10 A He didn't say we will not approve 11 it He said it would take more time 12 were having trouble getting there I believe is 13 the phrase he used 14 15 16 17 18 And they And did we actually have to have that particular technique Q And then you relayed that holdup to the interrogation team is that right A Yes I basically asked the question 19 is this technique something in your experience 20 and expertise that is absolutely a must-have 21 22 Q And if they had said yes you would have gone back to John Yoo 23 A Yes 24 Q But they didn't say they needed it 25 A No they said they did not need it ACLU-RDI p 56 Page 57 1 and they wanted -- they didn't want that to hold 2 up the completion of the rest of the memo 3 Q And did they have a different view 4 of the necessity of the waterboard that was 5 communicated to you MR BENNETT 6 7 object to the form 8 MR LADIN 9 MR BENNETT 10 11 Well I'm going to I don't know who they is Sure Thank you Would you be specific BY MR LADIN Q Yes Did the interrogation team 12 have a different view that they communicated to 13 you as to the necessity for the waterboard 14 MR SMITH 15 THE WITNESS Objection No I mean the 16 waterboard that particular technique OLC 17 didn't never expressed the same hesitation 18 as they did about the mock burial 19 So all of the techniques that were 20 proposed were deemed important by the CTC 21 We never got to the point where I 22 had to ask them whether or not they needed to 23 have the waterboard because again John Yoo 24 only indicated the mock burial technique was 25 posing problems for them ACLU-RDI p 57 Page 58 1 BY MR LADIN 2 3 Q Well if we could go back to Exhibit 18 4 A All right 5 Q I'm going to ask you about 6 Paragraph 4 7 A Okay 8 Q So this is feedback that the IC 9 10 SERE psychologists are providing as part of the OLC approval process 11 A Yes 12 Q And if you look they say IC SERE 13 psychologists recommend using an escalating 14 interrogation strategy that has a high 15 probability of overwhelming subjects' ability to 16 resist 17 employ -- excuse me 18 culminate with pressure which is absolutely 19 convincing To accomplish this the escalation must 20 The escalation must And then it says The plan hinges 21 on the use of an absolutely convincing technique 22 The waterboard meets this need 23 A Correct 24 Q Is it your understanding that OLC 25 ACLU-RDI p 58 had some concerns about the waterboard that this Page 59 1 is feedback that is responsive to those concerns 2 A 3 remember 4 many of the techniques 5 questions about the waterboard but I can't 6 remember what they are at this point 7 At this point I can't I can't I mean they asked questions about Q I'm sure they asked Would you have been aware of any 8 techniques aside from these 12 that were 9 submitted to OLC for approval 10 A I'm sorry I don't -- could you was 11 I aware at the time or have I ever been aware 12 or what 13 14 Q Sure Let me ask it in all of those forms 15 So are you aware right now of any 16 other techniques that had been submitted to OLC 17 in this 2002 period for approval 18 A 19 20 21 22 No MR BENNETT Let him finish his question before you answer BY MR LADIN Q And would you have been aware at 23 the time if CIA was seeking legal advice from OLC 24 about the use of different techniques 25 ACLU-RDI p 59 A Yes Page 60 1 Q Would it have been possible for the 2 CIA to make a decision to use other physically 3 coercive techniques without you knowing about it 4 in 2002 5 MR SMITH 6 MR BENNETT 7 possible 8 9 Objection I object to that I mean anything is possible MR LADIN Sure BY MR LADIN 10 Q As far as your understanding of the 11 way the CIA operated once a decision was made to 12 use a physically coercive technique it would go 13 to your office for approval 14 15 A Yes For approval for the legality Q So as far as you know bearing in yes 16 17 mind your experience in the CIA they could not 18 have made a decision about using physically 19 coercive techniques without going through your 20 office 21 A They being CTC 22 Q CTC 23 A They could not have made a 24 decision -- well they would have had to go 25 through our office to secure legal approval ACLU-RDI p 60 Page 61 1 Q And no techniques were submitted by 2 your office to CTC except for those 12 3 techniques in 2002 4 5 6 A Those were the 12 techniques that were submitted to me yes Q And the only techniques that OLC 7 evaluated and approved in 2002 were these 8 Mitchell and Jessen techniques 9 10 MR SMITH 13 14 15 You can answer 11 12 Objection THE WITNESS Yes as best I can recall BY MR LADIN Q Okay Turning back to your declaration 16 So at Paragraph 50 on Page 9 17 A Wait a second 18 Q You say within a few months of the 19 Yes August 1 2002 Bybee memo -- 20 MR BENNETT Which paragraph 21 THE WITNESS 50 22 MR LADIN 23 MR BENNETT 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 61 ahead BY MR LADIN 50 Okay I'm sorry Go Page 62 1 2 Q You say the OLC confirmed that the EITs could be used on other HVDs 3 How did that work 4 MR BENNETT 5 that means 6 7 8 9 I am not sure what I object to the form MR LADIN Sure Let me ask it another way BY MR LADIN Q You say that the OLC confirmed that 10 EITs could be used on other HVDs within a few 11 months of the Bybee memo is that correct 12 A That's correct 13 Q How did the OLC confirm that 14 A I asked them if they could A few 15 months after the Bybee memo the CIA captured and 16 detained Khalid Sheikh Mohammed 17 well he was at that point in time at least 18 the biggest capture 19 He was the -- And the CTC people again 20 determined he was not cooperating would not 21 cooperate 22 possibility of using similar techniques that had 23 been used on Zubaydah on KSM 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 62 Q And so they wanted to explore the You said similar techniques they not identical Were Page 63 1 2 A identical I don't think they were absolutely That is my recollection 3 Q Do you recall any differences 4 A I don't believe that the so-called 5 bug in the box scenario 6 Zubaydah That was tailored for 7 I don't believe that that was ever 8 under consideration for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed 9 Q And when you say tailored to 10 Zubaydah in what way was it tailored to 11 Zubaydah 12 A Well the assessments of Zubaydah at 13 the time concluded that he was very afraid of 14 insects 15 So this is part of his 16 psychological makeup 17 particular technique was put together for him 18 Q So that is why this Now in the next paragraph of your 19 declaration you point to Exhibit N which are 20 specific guidance for the interrogations of 21 detainees -- 22 A Right 23 Q -- held at the black sites 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 63 This has been marked as Exhibit 38 Whereupon previously marked Page 64 1 2 3 Exhibit 38 first referral BY MR LADIN Q This is 38 4 And so you said I believe that 5 these are the guidelines for interrogations at 6 the black sites is that correct 7 A Yes 8 Q And so this is the instructions as 9 to the black sites as to how they are to conduct 10 interrogations in compliance with the legal 11 authorization is that right 12 A Yes as I recall yes 13 Q And this appears to have been sent 14 to Cobalt is that right 15 A 16 document The word Cobalt is contained there 17 Q So does this document describe the 18 That is what it says on the EIT program in 2003 19 A Yes 20 Q And it lists it lists on Page 1172 21 the enhanced techniques that were part of the EIT 22 program in 2003 23 A Correct 24 Q And these techniques are except 25 ACLU-RDI p 64 for -- well actually it does have the bug in the Page 65 1 box So these techniques are the 12 Abu 2 Zubaydah techniques -- sorry 3 burial The 11 minus mock 4 A Appear to be 5 Q So was the EIT program a 6 duplication of the techniques that were 7 authorized for Abu Zubaydah that could now be 8 used on other detainees 9 MR SMITH 10 THE WITNESS Objection Well they say the Abu 11 Zubaydah the techniques developed for Abu 12 Zubaydah proved to serve as a template for 13 the enhanced interrogation techniques that 14 were used on a number of subsequent high 15 value detainees 16 17 BY MR LADIN Q Do you see any technique listed here 18 that is different than the ones that were 19 approved on Abu Zubaydah 20 A No they appear to be the ones 21 Q Okay 22 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 65 And these were the techniques that are contained in Exhibit 17 A Well again you gave me the one with the blank page Q Oh I do apologize for that Page 66 1 A Get rid of this one Yes 2 Q And eventually the programs the 3 techniques that were part of the EIT program 4 changed is that correct 5 A Yes 6 Q But certain of the core enhanced 7 interrogation techniques persisted throughout the 8 life of the interrogation program is that 9 correct 10 A I don't know what you mean by core 11 Q Were there a number of techniques 12 that were present in the enhanced interrogation 13 program for the lifetime of that program 14 A Yes 15 Q And other of the techniques were 16 dropped 17 A That's correct 18 Q Had you kept up with Drs Mitchell 19 and Jessen during the years of the program 20 A Had I kept up with them 21 Q Did you consult with them 22 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 66 periodically A I would as the years went on sure I talked to them Q And they talked to me Yes And did you get reports about their Page 67 1 2 3 4 activities in the program A I'm sure they told me what they were doing at any particular time yes Q Do you have -- so on the on 5 Frontline I believe you said that later in the 6 program Mitchell and Jessen were training CIA 7 people to conduct the interrogations 8 skilled trainers and patient teachers They were Do you stand by that 9 10 A I do 11 Q So your understanding was that they 12 taught other interrogators how to use their 13 techniques 14 A Yes 15 Q How do they trained other CIA 16 interrogators in the program 17 A That was my understanding yes 18 Q And over the years you dealt with 19 different permutations of the EIT program all of 20 the way up until 2007 when Secretary of State 21 Rice wanted a personal briefing on the program 22 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 67 A Well that is correct I mean I was involved in it after that point too Q All right We will get there but let's start with that meeting with Secretary Rice Page 68 1 So in your book I don't know 2 which I don't know what Exhibit Number it is I 3 think it is maybe 47 Is that 4 A Okay 5 Q So if you look at the end of the 6 excerpt it is Pages 269 to 270 7 take a look If you want to 8 A All right 9 Q So it should be the right by the 10 end of the copy 11 A Right right right 12 Beginning with a failed nomination 13 remember that 14 Q Right Yes I Yes Yes So you write there 15 Secretary of State Rice wanted a personal 16 briefing on the newly refined slimmed down set of 17 techniques and she wanted to get it directly 18 from the original architects of the program two 19 outside psychologists the agency had hired under 20 contract more than five years earlier 21 When you write two outside 22 psychologists are you referring to Drs Mitchell 23 and Jessen 24 A Yes 25 Q And you said Secretary of State Rice ACLU-RDI p 68 Page 69 1 wanted a personal briefing on the EIT program 2 A Yes 3 Q And she wanted to get it directly 4 from the original architects 5 A Yes 6 Q And those original architects are 7 Drs Mitchell and Jessen 8 A Yes 9 Q And then on Page 270 you write 10 just at the very top The two EIT architects 11 and then you describe the meeting 12 say They talked about their backgrounds in 13 the second sentence the genesis of the original 14 techniques they came up with the safeguards 15 built into the program the way the program 16 evolved and had been refined over the years and 17 so on 18 19 20 21 And then you Do you stand by that account A Yes Based on my recollection as I was writing yes Q So Drs Mitchell and Jessen 22 described the genesis of the original techniques 23 they came up with 24 A That was my recollection 25 Q And they described the safeguards ACLU-RDI p 69 Page 70 1 A Yes 2 Q Do you remember what those 3 safeguards were 4 A Well I'm sure it included the 5 presence of medical personnel 6 come back to headquarters for approvals for each 7 technique 8 9 10 11 12 Q You will need to Things of that nature And some of those safeguards changed over the years correct A No I'm not aware of that Could you be more specific Q Sure There came a time when the 13 Office of Medical Services made recommendations 14 as to how the use of the waterboard should be 15 different than it was early on in the program 16 Do you recall that 17 A Yes vaguely yes 18 Q Okay There were also changes to 19 the amount of time sleep deprivation was 20 authorized for 21 A That's correct that's correct 22 Q So you write here that they 23 described the way the program had evolved and 24 been refined over the years 25 ACLU-RDI p 70 A Correct Page 71 1 Q What did you mean by that 2 A Well by late 2006 the program had 3 been refined as we talked about earlier 4 of the techniques were no longer being used like 5 the waterboard 6 Some Others like sleep deprivation The 7 periods of authorized sleep deprivation beginning 8 in late 2006 were shrunk 9 duration 10 Q There was less That kind of thing And do you know what Drs Mitchell 11 and Jessen role was in the refinement of the 12 program at that time 13 A No no At the time I was talking 14 to our CTC lawyers and the head of CTC at the 15 time 16 communicating with 17 So those were the people that I was Q And what were the techniques 18 Secretary Rice was concerned about during this 19 meeting 20 21 MR BENNETT Because you are assuming she was concerned 22 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 71 Well I object MR LADIN Sure BY MR LADIN Q Was Secretary Rice concerned about any techniques at this meeting Page 72 1 A I don't I don't recall any specific 2 techniques 3 recollection was she was highly complimentary of 4 the way the program had been conducted and 5 managed She had previously expressed 6 7 As I said in the book my concerns about the use of nudity on the detainees 8 Q Uh-huh What did you -- 9 A I don't I don't recall -- what I 10 was starting to say was I don't recall that 11 specific her specifically bringing that up at 12 the meeting though 13 14 15 Q Do you remember what her concern about nudity was A Nudity No she had expressed it in 16 various principal committee meetings for the 17 previous two years 18 just thought it was unduly undignified and 19 insulting to do that 20 Q I mean my impression was she If you look at what was Exhibit U to 21 your declaration which you identified in your 22 declaration as an e-mail memorializing the 23 content of that meeting 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 72 A Right MR LADIN And we can mark that Page 73 1 one Oh sorry it has already been marked 2 as Exhibit 35 3 Whereupon previously marked 4 Exhibit 35 first referral THE WITNESS 5 6 7 8 Okay BY MR LADIN Q So is this a contemporaneous record of the meeting that took place with Secretary Rice 9 A It appears to be yes 10 Q And if you look on the second page 11 it says that the Secretary expressed her concern 12 about a particular sleep deprivation method MR BENNETT 13 14 referring to MR LADIN 15 16 17 18 Where are you Sure sorry So the paragraph begins on the second page BY MR LADIN Q It says During the discussion of 19 the sleep deprivation EIT the Secretary of 20 State made it clear that her concern did not 21 center on depriving a detainee of sleep but the 22 specific method of implementation and the image 23 the EIT evoked 24 image was reminiscent of images associated with 25 Abu Ghraib ACLU-RDI p 73 She expressed concern that this Page 74 1 Is that accurate 2 A Yes it refreshes my recollection 3 Yes 4 discussion along those lines yes 5 I believe I remember something a Q And her concern was that a detainee 6 who was nude and shackled in a standing sleep 7 deprivation posture evoked images of Abu Ghraib 8 A That it what it says yes 9 Q And that is what you recall being 10 11 expressed in the meeting A Yes I do now But I didn't when I 12 was writing my book because I didn't have 13 contemporaneous documents to look at 14 Q Now having refreshed your 15 recollection do you recall whether the Secretary 16 of State asked for some change to be made in the 17 sleep deprivation technique 18 A No I don't recall that 19 Q Okay Well if you look at the last 20 couple of paragraphs on the page it says that 21 Doctors Jessen and Mitchell indicated the 22 possibility of devising alternative methods to 23 deprive sleep 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 74 And then at the very bottom of the page it says Jessen and Mitchell will work on Page 75 1 alternative methods for implementing sleep 2 deprivation EIT and proposed courses of action 3 4 Does that refresh your recollection A Vaguely vaguely I mean I 5 certainly don't deny that that came up 6 no reason to dispute it 7 8 9 I have I just don't really remember that part of the conversation Q Do you know why it would be Mitchell 10 and Jessen who would be tasked with devising a 11 new form of sleep deprivation 12 A Well they were the you know it 13 was Dr Mitchell Dr Jessen and me representing 14 the CIA at the meeting 15 So I mean it was a colloquy among 16 us and Secretary Rice 17 them being the experts she asked them 18 Q With them being there and And as far as you are aware there 19 would not be other people in the CIA who would be 20 more appropriately tasked with devising new EITs 21 A No I -- there could well have been 22 They just didn't were not in the room with the 23 Secretary at the time 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 75 Q And that is because the Secretary wanted the architects of the program there Page 76 1 A Yes 2 Q I would like to show you the Office 3 of Professional Responsibility report 4 A Okay 5 MR LADIN 6 this as Exhibit 49 7 marked for identification 9 THE WITNESS Yes I remember it BY MR LADIN 11 12 It is quite long Exhibit Number 49 8 10 So if we could mark Q You've seen the this report before correct 13 A Yes I have 14 Q And you were interviewed as part of A I submitted to a voluntary 15 16 17 18 it interview yes Q If you look on Page 126 19 MS QUERNS 20 MR LADIN 21 Yes I am sorry What is the exhibit number sorry Did you -- 24 THE REPORTER 25 MR LADIN ACLU-RDI p 76 I think it has been marked 22 23 Are you marking this 49 49 I'm Page 77 MR BENNETT 1 2 What page BY MR LADIN Q 3 If you look at the bottom paragraph 4 this refers to an interview with Dan Levin 5 you remember Dan Levin Do 6 A Oh sure sure 7 Q Did you interact with him as part of 8 your -MS QUERNS 9 MR LADIN 10 11 126 BY MR LADIN Q 12 13 What page are you on Did you interact with Mr Levin as part of your work in the General Counsel's Office 14 A Sure 15 Q So if you look at the last 16 paragraph here on 126 it says that he asked CIA 17 for information about how sleep deprivation was 18 administered Do you see that 19 A I see it 20 Q And he says he was surprised to 21 learn that no one at OLC had previously asked the 22 CIA about the methods used to keep prisoners 23 awake 24 A Yes I see that 25 Q Is that your recollection as well ACLU-RDI p 77 Page 78 1 that no one at OLC had asked CIA for information 2 about how sleep deprivation was administered 3 4 5 A No I just have no recollection one way or the other about that Q Okay It says that he learned that 6 detainees were typically shackled in a standing 7 position naked except for a diaper with their 8 hands handcuffed at head level to a chain bolted 9 to the ceiling 10 11 Is that your understanding of how the sleep deprivation EIT was administered 12 A As I recall yes 13 Q Now do you think sleep deprivation 14 is fairly similar to jet lag 15 MR BENNETT 16 MR LADIN 17 MR BENNETT 18 21 22 Sure But if you can answer that 19 20 I object THE WITNESS have no idea I have no idea I I don't -- BY MR LADIN Q Okay And just finally on that 23 meeting with Secretary Rice if you look back at 24 the last page of the e-mail that was described in 25 the meeting ACLU-RDI p 78 Page 79 1 2 A Oh wait I've got to go back we done with this or should I keep it 3 Q You should keep it 4 A Okay 5 was that That is exhibit what what 6 MR BENNETT U 7 THE WITNESS Okay 8 Go ahead 9 BY MR LADIN 10 11 Are Q Sure I'm back there So it says Dr Mitchell -- this is on the second page near the bottom 12 A Uh-huh 13 Q It says Dr Mitchell raised the 14 issue of nudity 15 was polite she was firm 16 her decision on nudity so there was no need for 17 discussion on that issue 18 19 While the Secretary of State She had already made Do you recall that A Yes I mean you know I indicated 20 a few minutes ago I do recall her concerns about 21 nudity being a subject there 22 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 79 I couldn't remember the exact way it came up until reading this Q And so when her decision was firm that means she was saying no more nudity Page 80 1 A That is correct 2 Q And had the idea going into the 3 meeting with Drs Mitchell and Jessen had you 4 discussed the nudity EIT 5 A I don't recall whether -- you mean 6 we discussed that I discussed it with Drs 7 Mitchell and Jessen 8 Q That's right 9 A We had a you know a preparatory -- 10 that is not the word 11 We had a discussion about how the 12 meeting we were going to do the briefing 13 don't recall whether we specifically talked about 14 us raising the issue of nudity 15 16 17 18 But it had been a concern of hers for some time Q And was your understanding that unless she eliminated it -- let me rephrase that 19 Was your understanding that 20 Dr Mitchell wanted to preserve nudity as an 21 enhanced interrogation technique 22 A As I recall again it was CTC that 23 thought nudity was a valuable and important 24 feature of the program 25 ACLU-RDI p 80 I Q Okay So getting back to that Page 81 1 guidance we looked at that was Exhibit N to your 2 declaration marked as Exhibit 38 3 A Okay 4 Q You said that the this guidance 5 appears to have been sent to Cobalt in January of 6 2003 7 8 Is that right A Well I'm just reading the word Cobalt that are typed here 9 So I'm just -- again this is a 10 document that was that is what 14 years old 11 can't specifically remember where it was sent 12 But I was just reacting to it being these words 13 Cobalt on there 14 15 Q Do you have a reason to believe this document was not sent to Cobalt 16 A No 17 Q And you've identified this as the 18 19 guidance that went out to black sites right A That's correct yes 20 Whereupon previously marked 21 Exhibit 21 first referral 22 23 BY MR LADIN Q So I would like to show you what 24 we've previously marked as Exhibit Number 21 25 which is this is a document the CIA produced in ACLU-RDI p 81 I Page 82 1 response to the Senate report the Senate 2 Subcommittee on Intelligence 3 A Okay 4 MR LADIN 5 MR BENNETT 6 Here is one for you Thank you BY MR LADIN 7 Q Have you seen that document before 8 A No 9 Q Okay I would like to direct your 10 attention to Page 58 And it is confusing 11 because this document is paginated multiple 12 times But we will get there 13 The 58 that I'm referring to begins 14 with the words However nine of the study's 15 examples 16 A Yes I've got it 17 MR SMITH Give us a second 18 MR LADIN Sure 19 20 21 22 23 BY MR LADIN Q I'm going to ask you about the second paragraph here MR SMITH begins with We also believe 24 MR LADIN 25 THE WITNESS ACLU-RDI p 82 The paragraph that That's correct Okay I see it Page 83 1 2 BY MR LADIN Q Okay So it says After the 3 standard was approved and communicated in 4 January 2003 interrogation operations at 5 redacted were generally in line with the 6 guidance with some isolated exceptions 7 identified in the study and described elsewhere 8 in the response 9 10 And you said you have not seen this document before is that right 11 A No no 12 Q All right Well let's -- well let 13 me first ask is it your understanding that after 14 January 2003 interrogation operations at Cobalt 15 were generally in line with the guidance that was 16 sent to Cobalt that is your Exhibit N 17 A That was my understanding yes 18 Whereupon previously marked 19 Exhibit 10 first referral 20 21 22 BY MR LADIN Q 25 ACLU-RDI p 83 I would like to also show you what has been previously marked as Exhibit 10 23 24 Okay You've seen this report before I think is that right A That is the IG report Page 84 1 Q Yes 2 A Yes I've seen that 3 Q And you were interviewed as part of A I must have been 4 it 5 6 interviewed a lot in those days 7 8 I was being Q Yes If you go to the page marked Bates 1392 9 A 1392 10 Q Sorry there is multiple Bates 11 stamps 12 There is the D series in which this 13 would be D63 14 number 15 16 17 18 A But below that there a U S Bates Okay So if I go to D63 I will find it -Q You will Unless this is also multiply paginated 19 20 That doesn't compute And the paragraph I'm asking you about is 122 21 A Okay I've got it 22 Q And it says the word Cobalt is 23 Okay sort of inserted there above a redaction 24 A Right 25 Q And it says The employment of EITs ACLU-RDI p 84 Page 85 1 is now reportedly well codified 2 interrogation plans are prepared and sent to 3 headquarters for each detainee 4 5 Written Is that your understanding of how the EIT program worked 6 A Yes 7 Q So written interrogation plans 8 would be prepared for different detainees sent 9 to headquarters for approval and then that 10 approval would flow back to the black site 11 12 13 14 15 A If there was an approval yes that is how it would work Q And this appears to indicate that that process was in place at Cobalt A Well could we define our terms 16 The Cobalt was not a site where the high value 17 detainees that were subjected to the enhanced 18 interrogation program were housed 19 Those are when I say black sites 20 what I mean to say is those secret prisons where 21 the high value detainees beginning with Abu 22 Zubaydah were detained 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 85 Q So is it your understanding that EITs were not authorized at Cobalt A That's correct Page 86 1 Q So when it says At Cobalt the 2 employment of EITs is now reportedly well 3 codified you understand that to mean that in 4 fact no EITs were authorized at Cobalt 5 A That is my recollection 6 Q What is your recollection based on 7 A My memory 8 Q So to return to Exhibit N to your 9 10 I mean Is that -- declaration that is the guidance that went out to black sites correct 11 A Right right 12 Q And that guidance went out to 13 January yes '03 Cobalt is that correct 14 A It appears to have been 15 Q And it describes the process whereby 16 detainees at Cobalt could be subjected to 17 enhanced interrogation techniques is that 18 correct 19 20 21 22 MR BENNETT itself Well it speaks for So I object BY MR LADIN Q Well to the extent that Mr Rizzo 23 to the extent that you are testifying about 24 whether EITs were used at Cobalt or not I'm 25 hoping to refresh your recollection with the ACLU-RDI p 86 Page 87 1 2 exhibit to your declaration A Yes No I mean I think my 3 recollection remains what I said was that no 4 EITs were carried out at Cobalt 5 I I would direct your attention to 6 Page 2 of Exhibit N which describes so-called 7 standard techniques 8 Q Uh-huh 9 A So those for lack of detailed 10 terms my understanding was standard techniques 11 were those at least the authorized techniques 12 were to be the standard techniques were to be 13 carried out at Cobalt not the enhanced 14 interrogation techniques 15 Q Well let's take a look at Tab 13 16 Now your understanding is that if EITs were used 17 on a -- let me rephrase that 18 You said on Frontline that there 19 were abuses in the program but that every such 20 abuse would be reported internally by CIA either 21 to the IG or to the Criminal Division of the 22 Department of Justice is that right 23 A Yes 24 Q And the use of EITs in an 25 ACLU-RDI p 87 What I've said yes unauthorized fashion would result in such a Page 88 1 report 2 A Sure it would be unauthorized 3 MR BENNETT 4 MR LADIN 5 So let's mark this as -- is this 50 6 THE REPORTER 7 50 Exhibit Number 50 8 9 Keep your voice up marked for identification BY MR LADIN 10 Q Okay So this is Exhibit 50 And 11 these referrals to the IG they would be even for 12 people who are in the EIT program but had 13 unauthorized EITs used on them is that correct 14 A They were people in the EIT program 15 that were administered techniques that were not 16 part of the EIT program 17 saying 18 19 Q Yes Is that what you are Or that weren't authorized for that particular detainee 20 A Right right 21 Q Does this appear to be one of those 22 23 investigations A I have no idea 24 this is 25 Inspector General document ACLU-RDI p 88 I don't know what Disposition Memorandum Is this an I don't know Page 89 1 Q Yes 2 A Okay 3 Q All right So if you turn to the 4 second page -- actually I think there is -- why 5 don't you turn to Page 10 6 paragraph 26 on Page 10 -- So in that first 7 A Okay 8 Q -- does that describe the approval 9 process for EITs that you are familiar with in 10 that CTC RDG Received a cable requesting 11 authorizations to use EITs on a detainee 12 MR SMITH 13 THE WITNESS 14 15 16 17 18 19 Objection Yes BY MR LADIN Q And then there was a response with authorization to use the EITs A In this particular case or just as a procedural matter Q Yes I'm not asking about the facts 20 of this case but I'm asking if it describes the 21 EIT program procedures as you understand them 22 A Yes it describes the process 23 Q And so if you turn to Page 11 it 24 says that a cable describes the interrogation of 25 Abd al-Karim on April 2003 ACLU-RDI p 89 The cable states Page 90 1 that improved enhanced techniques of walling and 2 water dousing were used 3 And then they redact the names of 4 the participants 5 detainee receiving EITs in the EIT program 6 A Is that a description of a Let me see if I can make sense of 7 this paragraph 8 right 9 what they are talking about Again it is a little difficult to parse 10 But yes that sounds about right 11 Q 12 13 16 Well let's -MR SMITH Could we ask you to keep your voice up please 14 15 Yes I mean that sounds about THE WITNESS quiet guy I'm sorry I am a I will try to talk louder BY MR LADIN 17 Q So actually let's just turn back 18 to the CIA response which is I think 19 Exhibit 21 over there in your pile 20 A Oh the one I haven't seen okay Q Yes 24 A Okay 25 Q And if you go to Page 56 21 Right 22 23 ACLU-RDI p 90 Right below the special review Okay Page 91 1 MR SMITH Which one 2 MR LADIN Sure It is 21 And 3 it's page 56 4 this is the one that begins We agree 5 BY MR LADIN 6 7 And if there is multiple 56s Q So I just want to ask you about that paragraph 8 A Uh-huh 9 Q So it says CIA used enhanced 10 techniques which could have exacerbated injuries 11 sustained by detainees during capture 12 acknowledged in our response to Conclusion 20 13 techniques that had not been previously approved 14 by headquarters were applied to two Libyan 15 detainees who had foot juries 16 involving these detainees headquarters 17 ultimately approved the techniques the following 18 months as components of revised interrogation 19 plans 20 As In cases Does headquarters' approval of an 21 interrogation plan that involves enhanced 22 interrogation techniques follow the procedures 23 that you said the EIT program -- let me rephrase 24 that 25 ACLU-RDI p 91 Does this appear to describe two Page 92 1 detainees in the EIT program 2 MR SMITH 3 THE WITNESS 4 5 Objection It appears to BY MR LADIN Q In your view if headquarters 6 approved the use of EITs on a detainee was that 7 detainee part of the EIT program 8 9 10 11 A Yes if the EITs were approved on a detainee yes that would be part of the EIT program Q Okay So I would like to show you 12 Tab 16 which was previously marked as Exhibit 13 Number 44 14 Whereupon previously marked 15 Exhibit 44 first referral 16 17 BY MR LADIN Q And a large amount of this document 18 is redacted but I'm going to ask you about Bates 19 1580 to 81 20 MR SMITH Sorry 21 MR LADIN 1580 to 81 22 THE WITNESS 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 92 Okay BY MR LADIN Q And it says While in CIA custody Abd al-Karim underwent the following EITs Page 93 1 nudity sleep deprivation insult slap abdominal 2 slap attention grasp cramped confinement water 3 dousing walling and stress positions 4 A I see that yes 5 Q Would the CIA have a reason to lie 6 about using techniques on a detainee that it 7 didn't actually use EITs on 8 9 12 13 I'm going to object to THE WITNESS They would have no that 10 11 MR BENNETT reason to lie about that BY MR LADIN Q In your experience did the CIA keep 14 records about which EITs were used on detainees 15 in the EIT program 16 A That is my understanding yes 17 Q And in your understanding those 18 19 20 21 22 records were accurate A I can't guarantee that every one of them were accurate but Q Do you have any reason to suspect that the CIA's records were inaccurate 23 MR SMITH 24 THE WITNESS 25 ACLU-RDI p 93 Objection No I have no particular reason to believe that I just Page 94 1 can't you know sit here now and say for 2 certain everything that was put down was 3 absolutely accurate that is all 4 5 BY MR LADIN Q Sure And your understanding is 6 that if the CIA used EITs on a detainee who was 7 not authorized for the use of those EITs that 8 would generate an investigation 9 A Yes 10 Q And is it your understanding that 11 there were many such cases in which the CIA used 12 EITs on unauthorized detainees 13 MR BENNETT I'm going to object to 14 the word many because that means different 15 things to different people 16 MR LADIN 17 THE WITNESS 18 19 Sure I would use the word occasionally BY MR LADIN 20 Q Occasionally 21 A Yes 22 Q And in the absence of such an 23 investigation would you assume that a detainee 24 had been approved for techniques -- let me 25 rephrase that to avoid the word assume ACLU-RDI p 94 Page 95 1 MR BENNETT 2 mind 3 BY MR LADIN 4 5 Q Would the lack of -- I've MR BENNETT Thank you Any time BY MR LADIN 8 9 You read my learned from you 6 7 Yes Good Q Appreciate it Would the lack of an investigation as to the use of EITs on a detainee 10 indicate that the EITs had been approved for use 11 on that detainee 12 A Yes I mean if there was no 13 investigation then of course that means the 14 techniques were approved had been approved 15 Q So on the basis of this document 16 does this document indicate to you that Abd 17 al-Karim a k a Mohamed Ahmed al-Shoroeiya was 18 part of the CIA's EIT program 19 MR SMITH 20 THE WITNESS 21 Objection I'm sorry BY MR LADIN 22 Q That is page 1580 23 A I thought we were done with this 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 95 one 1580 okay Yes I don't know what this document Page 96 1 is honestly it is so redacted 2 tell what it is 3 investigation or just a statement and a memo or 4 what 5 Q Like I can't I can't tell if this is an Oh this document was provided in 6 response to a discovery request asking about 7 which EITs were used on particular individuals 8 9 And it is a document that you are absolutely right is very redacted It begins 10 with bios and it appears to list the biographies 11 of different detainees 12 MR SMITH 13 Object to the characterization of the document 14 THE WITNESS Right 15 MR BENNETT And what is the 16 question 17 BY MR LADIN 18 Q The question is on the basis of 19 this document that was provided by the CIA does 20 it indicate to you that this individual was part 21 of the EIT program 22 MR SMITH 23 THE WITNESS Objection Well it indicates he 24 underwent the following EITs 25 it says ACLU-RDI p 96 That is what Page 97 1 2 3 BY MR LADIN Q And does that indicate to you that this individual was part of the EIT program 4 MR SMITH 5 THE WITNESS Objection Not necessarily 6 you know it doesn't say he underwent the 7 following approved EITs 8 9 I BY MR LADIN Q Well if we can go back to the 10 document you were just looking at which was the 11 CIA's response 12 A Okay Okay 13 Q Sure It is Page 56 14 Direct me to a page It is the document we were just looking at 15 A Right 16 Q And it says In the cases involving 17 those detainees Abu Hazim and Abd al-Karim 18 headquarters ultimately approved the techniques 19 A That's correct right 20 Q Does that indicate to you that those 21 two detainees were part of the CIA's EIT program 22 MR SMITH 23 THE WITNESS Objection If headquarters 24 ultimately approved the techniques I would 25 say they were part of the EIT program ACLU-RDI p 97 Page 98 1 BY MR LADIN 2 Q So specifically you would say on 3 the basis of the CIA's documents that you have 4 been provided Abd al-Karim was part of the CIA's 5 EIT program 6 MR SMITH 7 THE WITNESS 8 9 That is what it seems to indicate BY MR LADIN 10 11 Objection Q Do you have any reason to doubt that he was part of the CIA's EIT program 12 MR SMITH 13 THE WITNESS Objection I have no 14 understanding either way 15 remember this case 16 I honestly don't BY MR LADIN 17 Q And turning back to the document 18 with the biographies which is Exhibit Number 44 19 If you could just turn to page 1567 20 A Okay Got it 21 Q And do you see there a description 22 of another detainee was subjected to a list of 23 EITs 24 A Give me a second 25 Q Sure ACLU-RDI p 98 Page 99 1 2 A underwent the following EITs 3 4 Q 7 And those EITs are the EITs of the CIA's EIT program 5 6 Yes I see where it says he A They look like it Yes they appear Q Do you have any reason to believe to be 8 that this person was not part of the CIA's EIT 9 program 10 MR SMITH 11 THE WITNESS Objection I have no reason to 12 dispute it or confirm it 13 remember this name or this case 14 15 Again I don't BY MR LADIN Q Did the defendants ask you when you 16 were preparing the declaration about additional 17 detainees beyond Gul Rahman who you wrote about 18 specifically in your declaration 19 MR BENNETT I'm going to object 20 There is no basis that the defendants had 21 nothing to do with the preparation of the 22 declaration 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 99 MR LADIN Did the defendants see the declaration before it was finalized MR BENNETT I don't know I don't Page 100 1 think so 2 BY MR LADIN 3 4 Q Well did you did you speak with the defendants about your declaration 5 A The defendants 6 Q Yes 7 A No 8 Q Did you speak with their attorneys 9 about the declaration 10 A No 11 Q How did you decide what your 12 13 declaration would include A Well my attorneys indicated the 14 areas that I should try to cover in the 15 declaration and -- 16 17 MR BENNETT beyond that 18 MR LADIN 19 basis of privilege 20 I'm going to object MR BENNETT And that would be on the Well I don't think 21 you have any right to ask him why I decided 22 to include certain things in his declaration 23 MR LADIN 24 MR BENNETT 25 ACLU-RDI p 100 Sure And -- And you have been operating on the assumption that the Page 101 1 defendants participated in that 2 saying that he says that is not correct 3 So go ahead and ask your next 4 question 5 BY MR LADIN 6 And I'm Q Sure I'm not looking to pry I'm 7 purely curious about whether -- so your 8 declaration makes a statement about whether Gul 9 Rahman was part of the EIT program 10 A Right 11 Q Your declaration makes no statements 12 about the other plaintiffs in this case Your 13 declaration was provided as part of this case 14 A Right 15 Q What I'm trying to ask you and 16 perhaps you can't answer is whether the 17 defendants asked you to declare something about 18 the other plaintiffs in this case 19 A No 20 Q Okay Did you ever seek OLC 21 guidance for a separate EIT program that was 22 distinct from the EIT program we have been 23 discussing 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 101 A No I mean we discussed earlier the fact that the EIT program as the years went on Page 102 1 was changed or refined 2 on -- well I sought guidance throughout the 3 course of the program for OLC 4 And I sought guidance But a you are asking about a 5 separate another EIT program separate and apart 6 from that 7 Q Yes 8 A No 9 Q And did you ever promulgate any 10 guidance within the CIA about the use of a 11 separate EIT program than the ones that Mitchell 12 and Jessen had recommended for Abu Zubaydah and 13 were later standardized 14 15 16 A No recollection of doing any such Q Did you ever hear about thing 17 investigations of EIT use on either Salim 18 Abdullah or Mohamed al-Karim 19 A You know sitting here today I 20 don't remember that 21 was not told about these things at the time 22 Q 23 But I'm not saying it I Okay MR SCHUELKE I'm told that the 24 staff has got lunch outside 25 time ACLU-RDI p 102 Is this a good Page 103 1 2 MR LADIN Yes let's break right here 3 4 Sure THE VIDEOGRAPHER Off the record at 12 12 5 Recess taken -- 12 12 p m 6 After recess -- 12 57 p m 7 THE VIDEOGRAPHER We are now on the 8 record 9 in the deposition of John Rizzo 10 11 BY MR LADIN Q Mr Rizzo I would like to direct your attention to document that we will mark -- 14 MR LADIN 15 Is this 51 Exhibit Number 51 16 17 The time now is 12 57 p m 12 13 This is the beginning of Videotape 2 marked for identification BY MR LADIN 18 Q And this is an Inspector General 19 report from the CIA about the death of Gul 20 Rahman 21 Page 1287 And I'm going to ask you about 22 A Okay I'm there 23 Q Okay So do you see it says at the 24 top of the page This cable written by Jessen 25 for a different detainee requested permission to ACLU-RDI p 103 Page 104 1 apply the following moderate value target 2 interrogation pressures as deemed appropriate by 3 Jessen 4 deprivation facial slap body slap attention 5 grasp and stress positions 6 Do you see that isolation sleep deprivation sensory 7 A I do 8 Q Is it your understanding that stress 9 10 11 12 13 positions are an enhanced interrogation technique A I don't believe they were -- I don't believe they were listed as such Q Maybe we can compare it to Exhibit N 14 to your declaration which is the interrogation 15 guidance 16 A Okay 17 Q Do you see where it lists the 18 19 enhanced techniques A Let's see Is that Paragraph 2 20 know I've looked at them before 21 remember -- 22 MR BENNETT I just can't Try not to mumble 23 your thought process is she has got -- she 24 doesn't know what to take down and what not 25 to take down ACLU-RDI p 104 I As Page 105 1 THE WITNESS I see okay 2 MR BENNETT Do you see what I 4 THE WITNESS Yes I understand 5 MR BENNETT Okay 6 THE WITNESS Yes I see in the on 3 mean 7 Page 1172 in the first full paragraph a 8 reference to stress positions as part of the 9 enhanced interrogation technique 10 11 12 BY MR LADIN Q And do you see sleep deprivation listed there 13 A I do 14 Q What about facial slap 15 A Yes 16 Q So does this turning back to the 17 table that is described on Page 17 of the IG 18 report would that appear to be proposing the use 19 of enhanced interrogation techniques on a medium 20 value detainee 21 MR SMITH 22 THE WITNESS 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 105 Objection Yeah I mean it would that is what it says BY MR LADIN Q Okay And it is saying Additional Page 106 1 interrogation methods for Cobalt detainees 2 Do you see that at the top 3 A Yes 4 Q Okay 5 Do you have any reason to doubt that the CIA IG report is accurate 6 MR SMITH Objection 7 THE WITNESS Honestly it has been 8 a long time since I looked at this 9 experience IG reports sometimes they are 10 totally accurate 11 things in it that are not accurate 12 13 14 In my Other times there are So I just can't judge at this point BY MR LADIN 15 Q Have you ever encountered an IG 16 report that made up say a cable from whole 17 cloth 18 A No 19 Q As part of your job would you 20 review the IG reports that were created as part 21 of the interrogation program 22 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 106 A Well sure Yes I'm sure I read this one when it was completed yes Q And if you thought at the time that it had misstatements in it would it have been Page 107 1 part of your job to bring that to the attention 2 of the IG 3 A Sure 4 Q Do you have any recollection of 5 identifying misstatements in this report 6 A I don't 7 Q Okay I would like to turn your 8 attention to what has been previously marked as 9 Exhibit Number 34 10 Whereupon previously marked 11 Exhibit 34 first referral 12 13 14 BY MR LADIN Q And I'm going to ask you about the second page of this cable 15 A Okay I've read it 16 Q Okay So do you see at the end of 17 Paragraph Number 3 it says There is no 18 indication he suffers from any psychopathology 19 nor that he would be profoundly or permanently 20 affected by continuing interrogations to include 21 HVT enhanced measures 22 A That is correct 23 Q Do you know what HVT stands for 24 A I believe it is high value 25 ACLU-RDI p 107 terrorist Page 108 1 Q So this person who is being 2 evaluated is being evaluated for techniques 3 including HVT enhanced measures 4 A That is what it says yes 5 Q And then the next paragraph makes 6 the recommendation that employing enhanced 7 measures is not the first or best option to yield 8 positive results 9 10 A Let me -- I have to read that next paragraph 11 12 Wait a minute Okay yes Q Does this cable appear to set forth 13 an assessment of whether to employ enhanced 14 measures on the subject of the cable 15 A It appears to yes 16 Q Now you wrote in your declaration 17 that Gul Rahman was not part of the high value 18 detainee enhanced interrogation technique 19 program 20 A That's correct 21 Q Why did you write that 22 A Because he was while I remember the 23 Gul Rahman case he had not been approved to the 24 best of my recollection and knowledge for 25 inclusion in the enhanced interrogation program ACLU-RDI p 108 Page 109 1 Q And by not been approved you mean 2 that a cable had been sent to headquarters and 3 had been denied 4 A Or what do you mean by that Well I just didn't have any 5 recollection that certainly not details about 6 whether a cable had been sent to headquarters or 7 not 8 part of the HVT -- sorry the enhanced 9 interrogation program 10 My recollection is simply that he was not Q And do you have a sense of why he 11 would be evaluated for HVT techniques by an HVT 12 interrogator if he were not part of the HVT 13 program 14 15 16 A I don't I don't know I just don't Q And beyond your recollection that no know 17 enhanced interrogation techniques were approved 18 for his use do you have any other knowledge on 19 which you based your statement that he was not 20 part of the EIT program 21 A Well as I said earlier my 22 recollection was that detainees at Cobalt were 23 not part of the enhanced interrogation program 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 109 Q And that continues to be your understanding in spite of the document you just Page 110 1 looked at that said that -- well we can look at 2 the document 3 If you turn back -- 4 A I'm sorry 5 Q This was just the exhibit that we 6 7 8 just marked A Which document I believe it was Exhibit 51 Oh the IG report Okay Refer me to the paragraph you want me to look at again 9 Q Sure So it is Bates 1287 10 A Okay You are talking about the 11 12 paragraph at the top Q Correct Yes which says which talks about 13 additional interrogation methods for Cobalt 14 detainees 15 A Yes 16 Q And it suggests using interrogation 17 pressures that you've identified as enhanced 18 interrogation techniques 19 20 21 A Well it says it requested permission to apply these certain EITs yes Q Yes Does that change at all your 22 recollection of whether enhanced interrogation 23 techniques were used at Cobalt 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 110 A Not really All this says is that Mr -- Dr Jessen -- I can't honestly I can't Page 111 1 tell from this paragraph 2 me 3 detainee This is confusing to This cable written by Jessen for a different 4 So I can't -- honestly I can't 5 just looking at it in isolation I can't tell 6 what this cable is talking about 7 8 9 But it is requesting permission whoever it is to do it Q And earlier you identified the 10 guidance as the enhanced interrogation techniques 11 as being sent to Cobalt 12 Did you have an understanding of why 13 that guidance was sent if enhanced interrogation 14 techniques were not authorized for use at Cobalt 15 A No as I said earlier there is a 16 section in there in the guidance about standard 17 interrogation techniques 18 it was sent 19 20 21 Q All right Let's return to the larger IG report which -MR LADIN 22 exhibit that is 23 Exhibit 10 Do you remember what Yes I previously marked as 24 MR SMITH 25 THE WITNESS ACLU-RDI p 111 Perhaps that was why 10 This Page 112 1 BY MR LADIN 2 Q Yes 3 A Okay 4 Just one second go to page -- 5 MR LADIN 6 MR BENNETT 7 Bless you Thank you BY MR LADIN 8 Q 9 U S Bates 1392 10 So if you If you go to either Page D63 or And if you look again at Paragraph 122 11 A All right I see it 12 Q This seems to describe a change in 13 the use of EIT at Cobalt after the promulgation 14 of the guidance 15 A It appears to be what it says 16 Q And it says that there are Is that accurate 17 procedures for using EITs and that written 18 interrogation plans are prepared and sent to 19 headquarters for each detainee 20 A That is what it says 21 Q Do you have a reason to believe that 22 is not accurate 23 A No 24 Q When you look at this does it 25 ACLU-RDI p 112 change at all your recollection as to whether Page 113 1 enhanced interrogation techniques were used at 2 Cobalt 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A Well no remains the same Q Okay I mean my recollection This speaks for itself But you don't have a reason to believe that this is inaccurate A That this paragraph -- no I don't have any reason to believe it is inaccurate Q Okay Do you think that there was a 10 separate interrogation program that Gul Rahman 11 was part of 12 A Separate interrogation program 13 Q Separate from the CIA's 14 A Enhanced interrogation program 15 Q Yes 16 A Well he wasn't -- as I say my 17 recollection is he wasn't part of the enhanced 18 interrogation program 19 So and he wasn't a CIA detainee 20 So I guess he was in a separate program yes 21 Q What would that program be 22 A What is the name of it 23 Q What do you understand to be the I mean -- 24 contours of the program that was not the EIT 25 program in which Mr Rahman was evaluated for the ACLU-RDI p 113 Page 114 1 use of enhanced measures 2 A Well it was the use of measures 3 that didn't that were not part of the EIT menu 4 of techniques 5 6 It was since I mentioned earlier this so-called standard interrogation 7 Q Well if we can just return to that 8 cable we were looking at which is U S Bates 9 1057 It has been marked Exhibit 34 10 A Okay I've got it 11 Q If you look at the end of 12 Paragraph 3 when it says HVT enhanced measures 13 is your understanding that those are enhanced 14 interrogation techniques 15 A That says enhanced measures 16 Q Do you have an understanding of what 17 that term means 18 A 19 Actually I don't As I say I refer to it I've always referred to -- 20 MR BENNETT Keep your voice up 21 THE WITNESS I've always referred 22 to the program as enhanced interrogation 23 program 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 114 BY MR LADIN Q Okay Do you sitting here today Page 115 1 do you have any understanding of HVT enhanced 2 measures as including something different than 3 the enhanced interrogation techniques 4 A Something different than the 5 enhanced interrogation 6 that phrase means is puzzling to me 7 8 9 No I don't -- honestly I don't know what it honestly what it entails Q Okay All right Well let's go 10 back to the CIA's response to the Senate report 11 which -- 12 13 14 15 MR LADIN What is that one marked BY MR LADIN Q Marked as 21 This is the one that begins with Memorandum for 16 A Yes 17 Q And you said you had not previously 18 Okay read this document is that correct 19 A That's correct I have not 20 Q Do you have any reason to believe 21 that the CIA's comments to the Senate were 22 inaccurate 23 MR SMITH 24 THE WITNESS 25 ACLU-RDI p 115 believing that no Objection I have no reason for Page 116 1 BY MR LADIN 2 Q In your experience would the CIA 3 make misrepresentations to members of Congress 4 about this enhanced interrogation program 5 A No 6 Q Okay 7 If you turn to Page 25 you see there the -- 8 MR SMITH 9 THE WITNESS 10 Give us a second Hold it BY MR LADIN 11 12 Do Q Sure This is the Page 25 that begins CIA remains grateful 13 A All right I have it 14 Q Okay 16 A I do 17 Q It says We agree that CIA should 15 Do you see the second bullet point 18 have done more from the beginning of the program 19 to ensure there was no conflict of interest real 20 or potential with regard to the contractor 21 psychologists who designed and executed those 22 techniques while also playing a role in 23 evaluating their effectiveness as well as other 24 closely related tasks 25 ACLU-RDI p 116 Did you have an understanding that Page 117 1 the contractor psychologists who designed and 2 executed the techniques played a role in 3 evaluating the techniques' effectiveness 4 5 I believe I had that impression Q And did that suggest to you the yes 6 7 A existence of a conflict of interest 8 A No it did not 9 Q Do you disagree with the CIA's 10 conclusion that there should have been more done 11 to prevent a conflict of interest from arising 12 with regard to the contractor psychologists 13 14 15 16 A Do I believe that now or at the Q Yes do you disagree with the CIA's time statement here 17 A No No 18 Q So you would agree that the CIA 19 should have done more to ensure there was no 20 conflict of interest when the contractor 21 psychologists evaluated their own techniques 22 23 A Yes I think that is a fair a fair suggestion 24 Q If you look back at the IG report 25 A This is a big one ACLU-RDI p 117 Page 118 1 2 Q Never mind we don't really need to do that 3 4 Actually sorry Let's go back to the office or professional responsibility report instead 5 A Okay 6 Q I'm going to ask you about a 7 statement on Page 100 8 A Okay 9 Q So it says there that you had an 10 MFR of a March 24 2003 meeting 11 12 MR SMITH What exhibit is before the witness 13 MR FREY 14 MR SMITH 15 THE WITNESS 16 MR LADIN 17 THE WITNESS 18 19 This is 239 What page What page is this Page 100 I don't see that BY MR LADIN Q Sorry It might begin on the 20 previous page I'm finding it myself 21 I've pointed you to the wrong page Sorry 22 Did you ever voice any concerns 23 about representations that the United States 24 government had made that all detainees held by 25 the United States were to be treated humanely ACLU-RDI p 118 Page 119 1 A I'm sorry Could you rephrase 2 you am I supposed to be looking at a document 3 here or -- 4 5 Q Are Well first just as to your own recollection 6 Do you ever recall there being a 7 concern about a statement made by the United 8 States -- and I see what the issue is here 9 The issue is that this is not the 10 most recent version of the OPR so this still 11 contains classification markings so it is not 12 going to be in this OPR 13 But to turn to the question was 14 there ever a time when the administration made a 15 public statement that all detainees held by the 16 U S government were being treated humanely and 17 a meeting was held to discuss whether that 18 representation was accurate as to detainees being 19 held by the CIA 20 A 21 22 Yes yes I generally remember that episode yes Q Do you remember what happened 23 MR SMITH 24 THE WITNESS 25 ACLU-RDI p 119 Objection I remember there was a the issue was I believe a statement the Page 120 1 White House was putting out as part of 2 National Day of -- I mean it was some 3 ceremonial announcement 4 And it contained a statement that 5 the United States treated detainees humanely 6 or should treat believed in humane treatment 7 of detainees 8 9 Something like that And there was an issue if my memory is correct Scott Moller was the General 10 Counsel at that time 11 Counsel of the Department of Defense and the 12 White House Counsel engaged in a discussion 13 about whether that statement was accurate 14 15 16 And he and the General BY MR LADIN Q And do you remember what the conclusion was 17 A 18 to stand 19 it was more the General Counsel than I who was 20 involved in that episode 21 22 23 I believe the statement was allowed Although honestly I wasn't as I say So I'm just giving you the extent of my recollection of it Q Do you remember the statement having 24 to be clarified so that it referred only to 25 Department of Defense detainees ACLU-RDI p 120 Page 121 1 A I don't remember that 2 Q Okay 3 A I don't remember that 4 Q Well let's look at a letter written 5 by John Bellinger so this would be Exhibit 52 6 Exhibit Number 52 7 8 9 10 marked for identification BY MR LADIN Q And the question I'm going to ask you about is on Page 3 11 A Okay I'm at 3 12 Q And so here John Bellinger writes 13 that Nudity combined with shackling a person in 14 order to prevent sleep would be viewed as 15 inconsistent with Paragraph 1C of Common 16 Article 3 17 understanding is that A reasonable person as 18 well as world opinion would consider such acts 19 to constitute humiliation and degradation of a 20 level to be considered an outrage upon personal 21 dignity 22 A Yes I see that 23 Q Sitting here today do you think a And specifically that his 24 reasonable person would agree that shackling a 25 prisoner to the ceiling while they are naked or ACLU-RDI p 121 Page 122 1 in a diaper is humiliating 2 MR SMITH 3 MR BENNETT I'm going to object in 5 THE WITNESS Do I answer or no 6 MR BENNETT Yes 7 THE WITNESS Yes I think it can be 4 8 9 10 11 Objection that humiliating BY MR LADIN Q Do you think it could be considered degrading 12 MR SMITH 13 THE WITNESS Objection I think humiliating 14 is again is a definitional term 15 know about degrading 16 17 I don't BY MR LADIN Q So you don't think it would be 18 degrading treatment to have someone shackled to 19 the ceiling in a diaper 20 A I don't know If you if I were 21 just to say offhand I would say it was 22 humiliating 23 to best describe it 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 122 Q That would be the term I would use Are you aware that the U S courts have found solitary confinement in dark cells Page 123 1 with no opportunity for cleanliness to be 2 degrading 3 4 MR BENNETT 7 THE WITNESS BY MR LADIN Q Would it make a difference to you if you did know that 10 MR SMITH 11 MR BENNETT 12 I don't know I don't know that 8 9 Go ahead if you know 5 6 Objection Objection Objection don't answer that 13 THE WITNESS No okay 14 MR BENNETT Well how can you 15 answer that 16 17 MR LADIN MR BENNETT Repeat the question BY MR LADIN 20 Q Would it make a difference to you if 21 you knew -- let me perhaps let me rephrase it 22 better 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 123 I would like to -- 18 19 Well I don't know MR BENNETT Okay BY MR LADIN Q Would it make a difference to you in Page 124 1 your assessment of whether this was degrading 2 whether U S courts had found the keeping of 3 prisoners in dark cells in solitary with no 4 opportunity to clean themselves to be degrading 5 MR SMITH 6 MR BENNETT 7 10 11 12 Objection Go ahead if you can 8 9 Objection THE WITNESS Yes that would I mean that would have an impact if the courts had held that sure BY MR LADIN Q Okay Now the way the program was 13 presented to you EITs would only be used so long 14 as the detainee was using resistance techniques 15 is that correct 16 A That's correct 17 Q And that is the information that you 18 relayed to OLC 19 A I believe it was yes 20 Q And the premise was that the EITs 21 would stop once the detainee became compliant 22 A Correct 23 Q And so the detainee could make the 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 124 EITs stop at any time by complying A Correct Page 125 1 Q Okay Turning back to the CIA 2 Inspector General's report 3 about -- 4 5 A This is the big one the special Q That's correct review 6 7 I'm going to ask you And that is Exhibit 10 8 A All right 9 Q And I'm going to ask you about Bates 10 1422 which is Paragraph 206 11 12 A number 13 14 I am sorry That is easy for me to find that Q Sure But that might take me just a moment 15 16 Could you give me the D MR SMITH 226 BY MR LADIN 17 Q 1422 18 A Oh I see 19 Q Yes so Paragraph D93 20 A Okay D93 21 Q Okay Thank you So at Paragraph 206 do you 22 see it says When a detainee did not respond to 23 a question posed to him the assumption at 24 headquarters was that the detainee was holding 25 back and knew more ACLU-RDI p 125 Consequently headquarters Page 126 1 recommended resumption of EITs 2 A I see that yes 3 Q Have you ever heard of that concern 4 A I may have 5 6 I don't have any present recollection of hearing it Q Okay Let's take Abu Zubaydah's 7 interrogation as an example 8 Bates 21 -- I'm sorry 9 Bates 2340 Can you get It is at 21 It is 10 A Still in the IG report 11 Q No sorry I'm about to hand you a 12 document MR LADIN So let's please mark 13 14 this one 15 Exhibit Number 53 16 17 18 19 20 marked for identification BY MR LADIN Q Paragraph 4 on the second page of the cable A 21 22 And I'm going to ask you about Okay Give me a second Yes I see it Q Okay So it says that At this 23 stage it is unlikely -- highly unlikely according 24 to the interrogation team that the subject has 25 actionable -- ACLU-RDI p 126 Page 127 1 MR SMITH Paragraph 4 2 MR LADIN Paragraph 4 yes 3 4 5 BY MR LADIN Q That the subject has actionable new information about current threats 6 Do you see that 7 A Yes 8 Q And if you turn to the first page 9 you see a date of August 10th is that right 10 A That's correct 11 Q Okay 12 If we turn to your book excerpts which is is that Exhibit 47 13 MR BENNETT 14 the date August 10th I'm sorry where is 15 MR LADIN 16 THE WITNESS In the middle there 17 MR BENNETT Doesn't that say 18 MR LADIN 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 127 No that is August '02 2002 21 22 Sorry August 2nd 19 20 At the top THE WITNESS Okay BY MR LADIN Q So turning to your book excerpt you wrote on Page 193 -A Wait a minute Is that part of the Page 128 1 book excerpts you handed me earlier 2 MR LADIN 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Uh-huh BY MR LADIN Q I think one of your attorneys actually has the book itself A double sides Q I'm sorry I can't get used to these Okay go ahead So you wrote that Just days after the EIT's began they ended They ended as soon 10 as Zubaydah's resistance ended 11 the stage of what our outside consultants called 12 learned helplessness 13 He had reached Do you see that 14 A On 192 15 Q I think it is 193 actually 16 17 Let's see MR SMITH Which paragraph BY MR LADIN 18 Q Let's get there 19 A Yes I see where that is now 20 Q Now when you say He had reached 21 the stage are what our outside consultants called 22 learned helplessness the outside consultants 23 are Drs Mitchell and Jessen 24 A That's right 25 Q What did you understand the term ACLU-RDI p 128 Page 129 1 learned helplessness to me 2 A Well I'm a layman My understanding 3 is that the notion that the detainee would 4 recognize that further resistance would be 5 futile 6 7 Q And so therefore he wouldn't be holding anything back 8 A Yes correct 9 Q Okay So we just looked at a cable 10 on Day 6 in which the team had assessed that 11 Abdullah Zubaydah was not holding back actionable 12 new information about current threats to the 13 United States That is at Paragraph 4 14 A Right 15 Q But it says that The team plans to 16 maintain the current level of pressures to 17 develop and refine this preliminary assessment 18 Do you see that 19 A I see that yes 20 Q I would like you to look at another 21 document 22 MR LADIN 23 Exhibit Number 54 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 129 So let's mark this marked for identification BY MR LADIN Page 130 1 Q If you turn to the second page 2 A Okay 3 Q It says Subject has continued to 4 say he knows of no threats to the United States 5 other than those he has already mentioned 6 7 And then it says In short -- that is at the very top 8 And then right before Paragraph C 9 it says In short however no significant new 10 details emerged from sessions especially in 11 regards to new threat information 12 A I see that 13 Q And you see that this is now Day 11 14 of the aggressive interrogation phase -- sorry 15 that is still on the page you were on before 16 17 18 A Right I wanted to look at the date of the cable that is all Q August 14th Yes And so this is now five days past 19 the previous assessment that he wasn't holding 20 back information 21 It says He seemed to display -- 22 if you look at Paragraph 3 above the redaction 23 It says He seemed to display a desperate 24 resignation at his inability to convince the 25 interrogators that he was not holding back ACLU-RDI p 130 Page 131 1 information 2 Do you see that 3 A Uh-huh 4 Q And do you see at the bottom it 5 says When the interrogators told him that his 6 protest of ignorance regarding additional 7 information about threats against the U S would 8 not stop them from using the water board subject 9 eyes teared his breathing increased and he 10 appeared desperate 11 Do you see that 12 A Yes I see that 13 Q Were you made aware during the 14 process of Abu Zubaydah's interrogation that 15 several days after he had been assessed as 16 compliant he was still being subjected to 17 advanced interrogation techniques 18 19 A no 20 21 MR LADIN Exhibit Number 55 23 25 ACLU-RDI p 131 Please mark this as Exhibit 55 22 24 I don't remember being told that marked for identification BY MR LADIN Q You can see that this cable is dated Page 132 1 August 19th -- 2 A Right 3 Q -- which is Day 16 of the aggressive 4 interrogation phase 5 first cable you looked at in which he was 6 assessed to be compliant 7 Now ten days past the that If you look at the comment it says 8 Subject stated he had no new or additional 9 information to provide at which time the 10 interrogation team -- 11 A I'm sorry 12 Q Sorry 13 A Can you direct me to where you are 14 15 16 17 18 reading from Q Sure It is the comment in the middle of the page A Subject was prepared for application of the waterboard That one Okay 19 Q Yes 20 A Okay go ahead 21 Q And it says that He had no new or 22 additional information to provide at which time 23 the interrogation team brought in the waterboard 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 132 Said he was repeatedly pressed and instructed that revealing the requested Page 133 1 information would stop the procedure 2 Do you see that 3 A Yes 4 Q He again stated he had no 5 information in addition to that which he had 6 already been provided 7 begged and cried that the procedure be stopped And he alternatively 8 Then it says He was strapped on to 9 the board and once again given the opportunity to 10 be responsive 11 until until he spasmed 12 After which he was waterboarded Then it says that The 13 interrogation team grilled the subject on the 14 issue of operations and identities and that -- 15 A I'm sorry 17 Q Sure 18 A Is it the same paragraph 19 Q Same paragraph 20 A Okay 21 Q It says that He continued to cry 16 I can't keep up with you 22 and claim ignorance of any additional 23 information 24 was distressed to the level that he was unable to 25 effectively communicate ACLU-RDI p 133 And that This continued until he Page 134 1 A Right I see that 2 Q Did you know at the time that 3 waterboarding was continuing ten days after Abu 4 Zubaydah had been assessed as compliant 5 6 A I don't recall being aware of how many specific days he had been waterboarded 7 My recollection was what I described 8 in the book 9 waterboarding lasted for about a week 10 Q My recollection was that the Yes And this appears to indicate 11 that he was still being waterboarded on Day 16 12 is that right 13 A That is what it appears to say yes 14 Q And it says that he was instructed 15 that revealing the requested information would 16 stop the procedure 17 A That is what it says 18 Q That he begged and cried but was 19 not able to produce that information 20 A That is what it says yes 21 Q And so he was waterboarded again 22 A Yes 23 Q Now if we go back to the IG report 24 back to that page which is Bates 1423 25 is D 94 ACLU-RDI p 134 And that Page 135 1 A Right I got it 2 Q And it says here on Paragraph 209 3 that The shortage of accurate and verifiable 4 information available to the field to assess a 5 detainee's compliance is evidenced in the final 6 waterboard session of Abu Zubaydah 7 According to Senior CTC officer 8 the interrogation team considered Abdullah 9 Zubaydah to be compliant and wanted to terminate 10 the EITs But it looks like the CTC and 11 headquarters believed that he continued to 12 withhold information 13 14 MR SMITH 17 That's not what it says 15 16 Objection MR LADIN Sorry BY MR LADIN Q If you turn the page it says CTC 18 believed that Abu Zubaydah continued to withhold 19 information 20 And then if you turn the page it 21 says that This generated substantial pressure 22 from headquarters to continue the use of EITs 23 A Yes I see that 24 Q Were you aware that the 25 ACLU-RDI p 135 interrogation team on the ground had repeatedly Page 136 1 recommended that the subject was compliant 2 A I don't remember that specifically 3 I remember there were occasions that the field 4 and headquarters had disagreements about 5 continuation of EITs on a given detainee 6 7 8 9 10 11 But I don't remember this specific case Q Would it be accurate to say that Abu Zubaydah could have terminated the use of EITs at any time by complying A Well that was -- yeah that was 12 that was the understanding 13 understanding 14 Q That was my And looking at these cables and at 15 the IG report do you believe that understanding 16 to be correct 17 18 A just reading this 19 20 21 22 23 I can't -- I'm just you know I'm It has been a long time I really am not -- I can't I can't make a judgment on that Q Well let's I mean let's look at Paragraph 209 again It says The shortage of accurate 24 and verifiable information available to assess a 25 detainee's compliance is evidenced in the final ACLU-RDI p 136 Page 137 1 waterboard session 2 Do you see that 3 A Yes I see that 4 Q Do you understand that to mean that 5 his waterboarding was caused by a lack of ability 6 to properly assess his compliance 7 A Let's see I'm sorry 8 follow that 9 I'm trying to read it here okay 10 11 12 I didn't Could you just rephrase it just Okay I'm sorry All right Could you ask the question again Q Sure Is it your understanding 13 reading this that Abu Zubaydah was capable of 14 terminating the employance of EITs on him by 15 complying 16 MR BENNETT Well I object because 17 all you are asking him is to read things in 18 the report 19 MR LADIN Well this is a report 20 that Mr Rizzo part of the production of 21 this was part of his job to read this report 22 and respond to the questions of the IG 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 137 MR BENNETT But the report is the report and it speaks for itself so -MR LADIN Well I'm trying to Page 138 1 understand an aspect of the authorization 2 here and I'm hoping -- 3 MR BENNETT 4 MR LADIN 5 MR BENNETT Okay but I'm just -I appreciate that He is not confirming 6 things He is just saying he is just 7 confirming these are the words that are in 8 the report 9 THE WITNESS That is correct 10 MR BENNETT Go ahead 11 THE WITNESS That is what it says MR BENNETT Go ahead over my 12 here 13 14 15 objection but go ahead BY MR LADIN 16 17 Q was given from OLC 18 19 Let's go to the legal guidance that MR LADIN Exhibit Number 56 21 marked for identification BY MR LADIN 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 138 Let's mark this exhibit please 20 22 Tab 11 Q Okay A I have before Have you seen this document Page 139 1 Q Okay I'm going to ask you about a 2 paragraph on Bates 319 3 MR SMITH 4 document as an exhibit 5 6 MR LADIN Sure I think it is marked 7 THE WITNESS 8 319 9 Have you marked the 56 BY MR LADIN 10 Q Yes 11 A Okay I have it 12 Q And do you see the last paragraph 13 there 14 15 I'm sorry What page MR LADIN Sure it is Bates 319 please 16 17 MR SMITH also marked as 262 on this document 18 MR SMITH Is it U S 319 19 MR LADIN Yes 20 THE WITNESS 21 22 23 All right okay BY MR LADIN Q So this is a document from OLC to you is that correct 24 A Correct 25 Q And this is based on the information ACLU-RDI p 139 Page 140 1 that CIA provided OLC on the use of the 2 techniques 3 A Yes 4 Q And turning back to the CIA IG 6 A Okay 7 Q It is Bates 1443 to 1444 5 8 report What page Paragraph 264 9 A 1443 10 Q To 1444 11 Do you see Paragraph 264 at the bottom 12 A Are you talking about 44 or 43 13 Q At the bottom of 43 14 A The paragraph that begins Agency 15 officers report 16 Q Yep 17 A Okay 18 Q Do you see that it says Some Right I see that 19 participants judged that CTC assessments the 20 effect that detainees are withholding information 21 are not always supported by an objective 22 evaluation of available information but are too 23 heavily based on presumptions of what the 24 individual might or should know 25 ACLU-RDI p 140 A Yes I see that Page 141 1 Q Does that seem to you consistent 2 with the OLC guidance we were just looking at 3 which says that CIA asked for already known 4 information to gauge whether the detainee has 5 reached the point at which he is no longer 6 required to resist 7 MR SMITH 8 THE WITNESS 9 10 Objection Well the paragraph of the OLC letter memo you referred to is the policy as I recollect it 11 The statement in the IG report from 12 three years earlier that predated the OLC 13 memo 14 the relevance of the two 15 So I can't actually I can't judge BY MR LADIN 16 Q Sure 17 the relevance 18 matter 19 20 I'm not asking you to judge I'm just saying as a factual Leaving aside the difference in the timeline -- 21 A Yes yes 22 Q -- the 2003 report is different than 23 how the process is described in this 2007 OLC 24 guidance isn't it 25 ACLU-RDI p 141 A Well according to -- well some Page 142 1 2 3 agency officers reported that yes Q So these agency officers would be the people on the ground using the techniques 4 A 5 didn't -- 6 Q I have no idea who they are Well it says doesn't it It says 7 that some participants in the program 8 particularly field interrogators 9 interrogators would be the people using the 10 They Field techniques wouldn't they 11 A Yes 12 Q That is in -- 13 A That's correct 14 Q And so is what those field operators 15 report inconsistent with the information that the 16 OLC was describing here in the 2007 document 17 18 19 A It appears to be inconsistent yes It is their assertions Q So at least as far as those field 20 interrogators were concerned in that earlier 21 2003 time period detainees couldn't always avoid 22 the use of EITs by complying could they 23 MR SMITH 24 THE WITNESS 25 ACLU-RDI p 142 Objection Well unless some participants in the program particularly Page 143 1 2 field interrogators apparently believed BY MR LADIN 3 Q And do you know if the program 4 changed as a result of the concerns that were 5 written down in the IG report 6 A Well I do recall the IG report 7 there were a number of recommendations that were 8 acted upon 9 review of the interrogation program 10 This was the first significant So as a result of this report 11 there were changes made 12 and tell you specifically whether this was one of 13 them 14 15 But there were changes made Q And you didn't yourself observe interrogations right 18 A I never did no 19 Q And OLC did they observe 20 interrogations 21 A I don't believe so 22 so 23 to my recollection 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 143 This report was taken very seriously by the agency 16 17 I can't sit here today I don't believe Because they would have had to -- no Q Not And as far as you were concerned you were relying on what people in the field and Page 144 1 people in CTC were telling you about the program 2 is that right 3 A That's correct 4 Q And you relied on them to implement 5 faithfully the legal guidance that you were 6 sending 7 A 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 MR LADIN 19 20 21 It is not BY MR LADIN Q Did you ever hear a concern that the waterboard was overused on some detainees A I probably I probably did MR BENNETT Just don't guess Yes no full answer but do you remember 17 18 Let's see is this is in the version of the OPR that we have 15 16 Yes THE WITNESS Repeat the question I'm sorry BY MR LADIN Q Did you ever hear a concern that the waterboard was overused on some detainees 22 A Yes I heard that 23 Q Do you remember the details of what 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 144 you heard A No No I can't remember which Page 145 1 2 3 detainees were being talked about Q Well staying with the IG report If you look at Bates number 1360 4 A Okay I'm on 1360 5 Q Do you see the Footnote Number 26 6 A I do 7 Q Now it says Consequently 8 according to OMS there was no a priori reason to 9 believe that applying the waterboard with the 10 frequency and intensity with which it was used 11 with the psychologists and interrogators was 12 either efficacious or medically safe 13 Do you see that 14 A I do 15 Q Do you remember that concern being 16 17 18 19 20 21 communicated to you A Well I remember reading about it in the IG report Q And did that lead to any changes in the program that you remember A I believe so Again this report 22 led to a number of changes 23 specifically whether this particular concern was 24 subsequently addressed or not 25 ACLU-RDI p 145 I can't remember I just remember there was OMS took Page 146 1 2 this position Q It also says that they were not 3 consulted in the initial analysis of the risks 4 and benefits of EITs 5 And that they believed that the 6 reported sophistication of the preliminary IT 7 review was exaggerated to OLC Do you see that 8 A Yes 9 Q Do you agree with that criticism 10 A I have no way of knowing I didn't 11 myself communicate with OMS at the beginning of 12 the program 13 As I told you my discussions were 14 with CTC 15 Q 16 Did you ever communicate with OMS about the program 17 A I'm sure I must have yes 18 Q Do you recall anything that OMS told 19 20 you about their views on the program A Actually what I remember is the OMS 21 people I talked to about the program was 22 worthwhile and professionally managed 23 Q Okay 24 A Okay 25 Q On pages on Page 140 ACLU-RDI p 146 Let's look at the OPR report Page 147 1 A Okay I have 140 2 Q Do you remember Mr Philbin from the 3 Office of Legal Counsel 4 A Pat Philbin yes 5 Q Do you see here at the bottom of 6 Page 140 there is a statement from Mr Philbin 7 A Yes I see that 8 Q He says that It had not been known 9 10 in 2002 that detainees were kept in diapers potentially for days at a time 11 A Yes I see that 12 Q Do you remember whether CIA informed 13 OLC that in 2002 that detainees were kept in 14 diapers for potentially days at a time 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 A I can't remember There were lots of discussions with OLC in 2002 Q Do you have any reason to doubt Mr Philbin's account A No I mean Mr Philbin is a good attorney and an honorable man Q So on the next Page 141 when he 22 says that All of these factors combined to 23 create a picture of the interrogation process 24 that was quite different than the one presented 25 in 2002 ACLU-RDI p 147 Page 148 1 2 Would you agree that that is an accurate statement 3 4 A statement 5 6 No I would not agree with that Q So what part of it do you disagree A Well there are references to the with 7 8 fact that Mr Philbin says that all of these 9 factors combined to create a picture that the 10 interrogation process that was quite different 11 from the one presented in 2002 12 I don't believe what the IG report 13 found its factual determinations were I don't 14 agree that they were quote quite different from 15 the one CIA presented to OLC in 2002 16 Q Well it seems that he says 17 specifically it had not been known that detainees 18 were kept in diapers potentially for days at a 19 time 20 21 22 Do you contend that it was known by OLC A I told you I don't know I don't 23 know what was told -- I can't remember everything 24 that was told to OLC during 2002 25 ACLU-RDI p 148 Q Right And then he says that they Page 149 1 also didn't know that the sleep deprivation 2 technique involved keeping detainees awake by 3 shackling their hands to the ceiling 4 5 6 7 A Yes on that one my recollection is that we did tell OLC about the shackling Q Okay Do you have a specific recollection of that 8 A No 9 Q Okay And then Dietary 10 manipulation and water dosing he says had not 11 been described to OLC and were not considered in 12 the classified Bybee memo 13 A 14 Is that accurate No I would disagree with that The again it is hard to locate a 15 total accuracy when we told something to justice 16 in a period 15 years ago 17 I have a firm recollection we told 18 OLC at some point 19 exactly that the that Ensure you know the 20 liquid was being provided to the detainees 21 22 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 149 Q I can't tell you when Does it trouble you that Mr Philbin had this reaction to the CIA's program MR BENNETT I'm going to object to that but go ahead and answer if you can THE WITNESS No it didn't trouble Page 150 1 me 2 So he is certainly free to express his 3 opinions 4 BY MR LADIN 5 I have a lot of respect for Mr Philbin Q And what about when John Bellinger 6 said that he viewed nudity combined with 7 shackling a person to prevent sleep to be 8 humiliation and degradation of a level that would 9 be considered an outrage upon personal dignity 10 Does that trouble you 11 MR BENNETT 12 MR SMITH 13 THE WITNESS 14 15 Objection go ahead Objection Does it trouble me that Bellinger said it BY MR LADIN 16 Q Yes 17 A No John was expressing his 18 sincerely held opinions 19 earlier it also reflected the view of his 20 superior Secretary Rice 21 Q As we discussed The data that you at CIA received 22 about the safety of the SERE techniques was 23 entirely about the use of SERE techniques on 24 volunteers is that correct 25 ACLU-RDI p 150 A Okay We are going back now to the Page 151 1 beginning of the program when it was first 2 presented -- 3 Q At any point 4 A Well what I remember about 5 reference to the SERE program was mostly at the 6 beginning as we discussed earlier 7 8 9 10 So I'm sorry Just repeat the question again Q Sure You were presented with a list of techniques 11 A Right 12 Q You were told they were based to 13 some degree on SERE training 14 A Right 15 Q You were presented and you presented 16 OLC with data as to the safety of those 17 techniques in terms of SERE 18 A Uh-huh 19 Q All of that safety data that was 20 based on SERE training of volunteers is that 21 correct 22 A That was my understanding yes 23 Q And neither Mitchell nor Jessen nor 24 anyone else pointed you to studies of prisoners 25 of war is that correct ACLU-RDI p 151 Page 152 1 A Not that I recall no 2 Q And you didn't yourself review as 3 far as you recall any studies of actual 4 prisoners of war is that correct 5 A 6 7 MR LADIN Exhibit Number 57 9 11 In fact I believe let's mark this as 52 -- oh 57 8 10 I did not marked for identification BY MR LADIN Q You were interviewed by the New York 12 Times about the long-term effects of some people 13 who had been subjected to enhanced interrogation 14 techniques is that correct 15 A Yes right 16 Q And you told the Times that in 17 hindsight -- 18 19 20 MR BENNETT Where are you in the article MR LADIN Sure you can review it 21 I will find out where I am in the article and 22 then I will tell you 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 152 I am on Page 6 but you can probably begin on Page 5 Specifically it says that General Page 153 1 Xenakis found decades of paper -- decades of 2 papers on the effects of abusive practices 3 Do you see that 4 MR SMITH 5 THE WITNESS 6 Q 11 Sure It is on Page 5 It says Back home in Virginia 9 10 Is it at the bottom BY MR LADIN 7 8 I don't A General Xenakis yes Right I see Q It says He found decades of papers that 12 on the issue science that had not been 13 considered when the government began crafting new 14 interrogation policies after September 11th 15 Do you see that 16 A I see that yes 17 Q Do you remember any research into 18 the effects of abusive practices at the time that 19 these techniques were being considered 20 A Abusive -- 21 Q Abusive practices rather than 22 training on volunteers 23 A Yes 24 Q And on the next page there is a 25 ACLU-RDI p 153 No I don't recall that quote from you that says In hindsight that Page 154 1 should have come to the floor 2 Do you see that 3 A Yes 4 Q Do you stand by that statement 5 A Yes that is what I said in 6 hindsight 7 8 Q Sure And you are a lawyer of course not a psychologist correct 9 A I am not a psychologist 10 Q And you were not aware of the body 11 of social science research that existed about 12 prisoners of war is that correct 13 A I was not no 14 Q And that research was not brought 15 to your attention by either Dr Jessen nor 16 Dr Mitchell is that correct 17 18 A I don't recall frankly anyone bringing it to my attention 19 Q Okay Later on Page 6 it says 20 that There was little incentive or time to find 21 contrary evidence 22 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 154 A Sorry I thought we had left that Q Sorry It is the second to the last sorry paragraph on that page Page 155 1 A Let's see Yes I see it 2 Q And it says there was little Right 3 incentive or time -- well I will read the full 4 sentence 5 With fear of another terrorist 6 attack there was little incentive or time to 7 find contrary evidence 8 solution 9 to talk 10 A Right 11 Q Do you stand by that assessment 12 A Well I stand by the quote that is 13 in quotes 14 The government wanted a They wanted a path to get these guys I did say that With respect to the first sentence 15 you know I don't recall telling the reporters 16 that using that phrase there was little 17 incentive or time to find contrary evidence 18 just don't remember saying those words 19 20 21 22 23 But the second the second sentence is an accurate quote Q And as to the first sentence sitting here today do you disagree with that A Well I disagree with that there 24 was little time to find contrary evidence 25 would I take issue with the idea of little ACLU-RDI p 155 I I Page 156 1 incentive 2 Q Okay 3 take issue with 4 A And what specifically do you Well the word incentive As I 5 say I don't recall using that term when I was 6 talking to the reporter 7 Q Okay 8 A It is clear it was clear to me and 9 10 I this is what I thought I articulated to them was that there was there wasn't much time 11 We didn't have the time to find 12 contrary evidence because of the fear of a second 13 attack and that one of our detainees would you 14 know was withholding back that information 15 Q Yes So you had an assessment that 16 this detainee was employing resistance 17 techniques and that there were methods that 18 would allow CIA to get through that resistance 19 is that right 20 A This detainee being Abu Zubaydah 21 Q Abu Zubaydah yes 22 A Yes 23 Q And there were experts who would 24 employ those resistance techniques on Abu 25 Zubaydah ACLU-RDI p 156 Page 157 1 A Yes 2 Q And would you say there was a lot of 3 pressure to let these experts do what they said 4 they could do 5 A No No There was a lot I mean 6 there was a lot of pressure to expose find out 7 about a second attack on the homeland 8 there was no pressure to determine what these 9 experts to do what they wanted to do 10 I don't remember that 11 Q Not what they wanted to do 12 what they said they could do 13 could figure out if he was withholding 14 information 15 16 But A But They said they Yes no no I mean that was important to find those things out sure 17 Q Now years later a former POW gave 18 his verdict on the program and you write in your 19 report that it affected you 20 On Page 242 of the excerpt 21 22 23 A 242 Oh you talking about Senator Q Yes Well you say you couldn't get McCain 24 his terse verdict to Porter it is all torture 25 out of your head ACLU-RDI p 157 Page 158 1 A Yes 2 Q Why is that 3 A I mean a man with the background and 4 the stature of Senator McCain and the unique 5 personal perspective and experience 6 man of that stature and also a very powerful 7 influential voice of the Senate to conclude to 8 say that that was all torture to him that did 9 have an impact on me Because I knew that would 10 11 12 For him a be his view would be influential Q And part of that was because he had actually been tortured right 13 A Right 14 Q Did you consult anyone else who had 15 actually been tortured when you were evaluating 16 the techniques 17 18 MR BENNETT he consulted with McCain 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 158 What you imply that MR LADIN Sorry That is a good clarification BY MR LADIN Q Did you consult with anyone who had been tortured when you evaluated the techniques A No No This portion of the book refers to a talk that the then CIA Director Page 159 1 Porter Goss had with Senator McCain 2 I was not present when Senator 3 McCain made that remark I talk about in the book 4 Porter came back and told me that is what McCain 5 said 6 Q And while he told you that some 7 version of the CIA's EIT program still existed 8 is that correct 9 A Yes 10 Q And after you heard that that 11 verdict from Senator McCain did you then inquire 12 with anyone who had been tortured what their 13 views on EITs were 14 MR SMITH 15 THE WITNESS 16 17 Objection No BY MR LADIN Q And do you know whether anyone else 18 in CIA reached out to people who had actually 19 endured torture to see what they had thought 20 about the EITs 21 A Not that I'm aware no 22 Q Okay As the years have passed do 23 you think that mistakes were made in approving 24 the EITs 25 A ACLU-RDI p 159 Well I think mistakes were made in Page 160 1 the program 2 Q And what are those mistakes 3 A I mean there were you know there 4 were well documented by now occasional abuses of 5 the program 6 techniques that were not approved 7 mistakes in terms of keeping the Congress 8 informed 9 People people being subjected to We made We should have in retrospect been 10 more open with the details of the program to many 11 more members of Congress earlier 12 nature 13 Q Things of that I believe when you talk about 14 abuses you are also referring to what happened 15 to Mr Rahman is that right 16 A Sure yes 17 Q You've described isolation and 18 19 freezing temperature as torture A Isolation no 20 temperature it could be 21 torture 22 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 160 MR LADIN I mean freezing It could be considered Just let's have this marked as Exhibit 58 Exhibit Number 58 marked for identification Page 161 1 2 BY MR LADIN Q So here it says that you identified 3 freezing temperatures and long periods of 4 isolation in complete darkness as torture 5 that is that not a statement you stand by 6 7 A Sorry I haven't seen this Is Let me look at this 8 Q Sure 9 A Okay 10 Q So just that second and third 11 12 So what part of this paragraph A Okay Yes I say in the second 13 paragraph that exposing prisoners to freezing 14 temperature and long periods of isolation in 15 complete darkness were not legally sanctioned 16 That's correct 17 torture 18 19 Q I would characterize them as Do you stand by that as to long periods of isolation in darkness 20 A It could be considered torture 21 Q Would you consider it torture 22 MR SMITH 23 THE WITNESS Objection Well I know they 24 weren't -- I know they were not improved 25 interrogation techniques ACLU-RDI p 161 Page 162 1 Now whether that crosses a legal 2 3 line to torture I can't say BY MR LADIN 4 5 6 Q Well what would your lay assessment A Well the third sentence the third be 7 fourth paragraph quotes me as saying So those 8 were clearly abuses 9 10 Q It does And then it also says I would characterize them as torture 11 A Yes 12 Q I just want to see whether you stand 13 by that 14 A I mean yes I could I would live 15 with that sure 16 Q Okay Now you are aware that the 17 President of the United States has said that he 18 believes torture works 19 A Yes 20 MR BENNETT 21 MR LADIN Which president The current one 22 President Donald Trump 23 to make me say that 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 162 MR BENNETT Are you just trying Yes yes precisely what I was trying to do That is Page 163 1 2 MR LADIN to say 3 MR BENNETT 4 you started to sweat 5 MR LADIN 6 THE WITNESS 7 here 8 BY MR LADIN 9 Q Absolutely 10 11 MR BENNETT 14 15 MR LADIN I know Okay can we get going We are almost done You are almost Absolutely BY MR LADIN Q So President Trump has used the word torture in a positive way hasn't he 16 MR BENNETT 17 question 18 BY MR LADIN 19 You just got tight and finished right 12 13 We still find that hard Q President torture -- president 20 torture 21 almost done 22 Could you repeat the Sorry we are almost done MR SMITH We've got to stop at 23 3 o'clock 24 going to get into evidence 25 this ACLU-RDI p 163 Okay We are You know none of this is ever Why are we doing Page 164 1 MR LADIN 2 conversation later 3 MR SMITH 4 Let's have it right now so I can get some time with the witness 5 MR LADIN 6 me to finish 7 quicker 8 9 We can have this Okay Would you allow I guarantee it will be MR SMITH Well I don't want to open my mouth but it is quarter after 2 10 The witness wants to leave at 3 o'clock to go 11 see his sick wife and we are asking about 12 his views about President Trump 13 hell are we doing 14 15 MR LADIN 18 19 Well if you will allow me to finish we will find out 16 17 What the MR BENNETT All right Let's go BY MR LADIN Q So President Trump has said that he believes torture works 20 A I read that yes 21 Q Have you ever spoken with President 22 Trump about torture 23 A I have not 24 Q Okay 25 ACLU-RDI p 164 Do you think it is dangerous when the President of the United States says that Page 165 1 torture works 2 3 MR BENNETT I object to that I'm going to instruct him not to answer that 4 MR LADIN 5 MR BENNETT Based on what He is in enough 6 difficulty without -- what is the point of 7 it I mean -- 8 MR LADIN 9 MR BENNETT 10 Go ahead if you want I mean -- THE WITNESS I'm sorry repeat the MR BENNETT Do you think it is question 13 14 Okay to answer it if you can 11 12 And dangerous that the President Trump -- 15 MR LADIN Has endorsed the use of 17 MR SMITH Objection 18 THE WITNESS Do I answer 19 MR BENNETT Do you want to answer 20 THE WITNESS I wouldn't call it 16 21 22 torture dangerous I would say foolish BY MR LADIN 23 Q Why is it foolish 24 A Well I just in my view it 25 ACLU-RDI p 165 doesn't it doesn't it doesn't do justice to a Page 166 1 complicated issue 2 3 MR LADIN MR BENNETT I Your turn You have 43 minutes 6 MR SMITH 7 MR BENNETT 8 MR SMITH 9 MR BENNETT 10 All right think I think I am done 4 5 Okay Who is counting Me Okay I don't have that authority but I do appreciate it if you -- 11 MR SMITH 12 I will move quickly EXAMINATION 13 BY SMITH 14 Q Mr Rizzo good afternoon My name 15 is Jim Smith and I have some questions that I 16 want to ask you 17 place before you what we are going to mark as 18 Exhibit 45A 19 The first thing I want to do is And for the record I will identify 20 45A as the declaration of John Rizzo 21 executed by Mr Rizzo on January 23 2017 but 22 containing all of the exhibits 23 Exhibit Number 45A 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 166 That was marked for identification BY MR SMITH Page 167 1 Q 2 you sir 3 A I think so 4 Q And is that the declaration that you 5 Do you have that document before executed on January 23 2017 6 A Yes 7 Q Okay And the exhibits that are 8 attached are they the exhibits that are 9 referenced in your declaration and now attached 10 thereto 11 A Yes 12 Q Okay And I think you testified 13 previously that you along with the assistance of 14 your counsel prepared this declaration 15 A That's correct 16 Q Have you ever met me before today 17 A No 18 Q Did you even know I existed before 20 A No 21 Q Had you talked to any of the lawyers 19 22 today for Drs Jessen and Mitchell before today -- 23 A No 24 Q -- about the particulars of the 25 ACLU-RDI p 167 lawsuit Or about anything for that matter Page 168 1 A I never talked to you folks about 2 anything 3 Q Okay 4 A I'm sorry let me amend that During the lunch hour -- 5 known Mr Schuelke for a number of years 6 talked to him in the past but -- I've I have 7 Q But nothing about this lawsuit 8 A Right 9 Q Okay During the lunch hour we 10 reached a stipulation We being counsel for the 11 plaintiffs Mr Lustberg on behalf of all 12 plaintiffs counsel as I appreciate it and 13 myself and we want to set the stipulation on the 14 record 15 So here it is 16 The parties stipulate that if the 17 court permits this deposition transcript to be 18 used at the trial which is presently scheduled 19 to proceed in June of this year then we further 20 stipulate that this declaration that you executed 21 and the exhibits thereto are admissible as 22 evidence with the exception of Paragraphs 22 23 31 the last sentence of Paragraph 40 Paragraph 24 48 Paragraph 69 Paragraph 70 Paragraph 77 and 25 Paragraph 78 ACLU-RDI p 168 Page 169 1 MR SMITH Now let me stop and ask 2 Mr Lustberg did I accurately set forth the 3 stipulation 4 5 MR LUSTBERG Yes you did BY MR SMITH 6 Q Okay So let me go to the 7 paragraphs for which we do not have a 8 stipulation 9 10 I'm going to ask you to turn to Exhibit Number 45 Paragraph 22 11 45A has the exhibits 45 doesn't 12 have the exhibits 13 the exhibits or the one with the exhibits 14 any one that is easily before you 15 You can go to the one without Pick A Okay 17 Q Page 24 Paragraph 22 18 A Yes my declaration Q Do you see where it says in your 16 19 20 And you want me to look at what Right I see it 21 declaration To my knowledge Drs Mitchell and 22 Jessen had no role in the OLC's assessment of 23 these techniques' legality and had no contact 24 with OLC personnel as they conducted their 25 assessment ACLU-RDI p 169 Page 170 1 Do you see that 2 A I do 3 Q Now sir is it true that Drs 4 Mitchell and Jessen had no role in determining 5 the legality of the techniques 6 A That is true 7 Q Okay 8 And you know that they are not lawyers right 9 A I know that yes 10 Q And is it fair to say that when your 11 legal counsel was sought the people that were 12 seeking legal counsel were Mr Rodriguez and 13 members from the office of the CIA 14 15 16 A Yes members from the CIA sure CIA people Q Okay And then the other part of 17 Paragraph 22 deals with contact And is it true 18 that Drs Mitchell and Jessen had no contact with 19 OLC personnel as they conducted their assessment 20 A To my knowledge they did not 21 Q Okay So Drs Jessen and Mitchell 22 weren't lobbying for the OLC to reach a 23 particular conclusion right 24 A No no 25 Q Okay ACLU-RDI p 170 Let's go to Paragraph 31 Page 171 1 That is on the next -- actually two pages later 2 Paragraph 31 looks to me to be almost identical 3 to the language in Paragraph 22 4 with that Would you agree 5 A Yes 6 Q And I take it your testimony about 7 the factual basis for Paragraph 31 wouldn't 8 change if I asked you any questions about that 9 A That's correct that's correct 10 Q So let's go on to the last sentence 11 of Paragraph 40 which is on the next page 12 Now do you remember that you were 13 asked questions during your examination by 14 counsel for the ACLU about possible psychological 15 effects that result or could result from the use 16 of EITs 17 A I remember that yes 18 Q Okay Now in this Paragraph 40 19 you state in that last sentence The JPRA 20 concluded no long-term psychological effects 21 resulted from the use of the EITs 22 Do you see that 23 A Yes 24 Q Tell us what the JPRA is 25 A It is it is a DOD entity and they ACLU-RDI p 171 Page 172 1 say in that paragraph it is called the Joint 2 Personnel Recovery Agency 3 And my understanding -- I was not 4 familiar with it before 9 11 but my 5 understanding became that they were responsible 6 for overseeing all of the SERE programs 7 training things of that nature 8 Q And what was the source of your 9 knowledge that the JPRA concluded no long-term 10 psychological effects resulted from the use of 11 the EITs -- 12 A My recollection is -- 13 Q -- as it appears in your 14 15 declaration A My recollection is I learned that I 16 got some piece of paper I can't honestly recall 17 whether it was the actual JPRA written 18 conclusion or if it was the DOD General Counsel 19 a man named Jim Haynes who I dealt with 20 regularly during these days whether he conveyed 21 that conclusion to me 22 23 Q And Drs Mitchell and Jessen were not part of the JPRA were they 24 A Not to my knowledge no 25 Q Let me show you what we are going to ACLU-RDI p 172 Page 173 1 mark as the next exhibit in the case 2 MR SMITH For the record I will 3 identify it as bearing U S government Bates 4 label last four digits 1913 and 1914 5 6 And we will mark this as Exhibit Number 59 7 Exhibit Number 59 8 9 marked for identification BY MR SMITH 10 Q Do you have 59 before you sir 11 A This is 59 12 Q It is the document -- 13 A Yes I do 14 Q You have it in your hands 15 A Yes 16 Q Okay 17 attention 18 record first 19 sort does it not I want to direct your Well let's identify it for the This appears to be a cable of some 20 A It does 21 Q Okay And I take it during the 22 period of time that we are talking about here 23 when you were acting as Counsel for the CIA you 24 had occasion to see cables like this 25 ACLU-RDI p 173 A Yes Page 174 1 Q I want to direct your attention to 2 the third paragraph of the cable 3 there Do you see it 4 A Yes 5 Q And I want to go about five lines 6 down the sentence that starts with In an 7 effort to help 8 A Yes 9 Q And let me read this into the Do you see that 10 record It states In an effort to help HQS 11 obtain the needed approvals so that base can 12 begin the next phase of the interrogation 13 process request and then there is a blank 14 SERE that is S-E-R-E psychologist assistance 15 Do you see that 16 A Yes 17 Q Okay 18 MR SMITH And counsel can we 19 stipulate that to the extent that the 20 government redacted information about who the 21 SERE psychologists were when it was Doctors 22 Jessen or Mitchell the government would type 23 in their name Can we agree with that 24 MR LADIN I'm not sure 25 MR SMITH Let me ask the ACLU-RDI p 174 Page 175 1 2 government MR WARDEN On the record I don't 3 know what this I don't know what is 4 underneath the redaction 5 MR SMITH I'm not asking that 6 Here is what I'm asking him so listen 7 carefully 8 identity of a SERE psychologist was called 9 out in the document the names were redacted 10 In the instances where the However in the instances when the 11 SERE psychologist was either Dr Mitchell or 12 Dr Jessen the government would type those 13 names in in the information that was 14 produced to us in discovery 15 Do you agree with that 16 MR WARDEN 17 Yes if their names were as stated in the document 18 MR SMITH 19 MR WARDEN 20 MR SMITH Correct Yes So is it fair to assume 21 then that the name that was redacted of the 22 SERE psychologist was a name other than 23 Dr Mitchell or Dr Jessen 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 175 MR LADIN I'm going to object because it is not at all clear that this is Page 176 1 the name that is being redacted 2 any other kind of identifier 3 MR WARDEN It could be If what was underneath 4 those two redactions were either 5 Dr Mitchell's name code name or another 6 identifier we would have substituted it 7 MR SMITH 8 MR WARDEN 9 10 Okay If that is not there then what is under the black is something other than those terms 11 MR SMITH Okay And I heard what 12 you said counsel 13 redacted 14 these documents from the government 15 16 And I don't know what was I'm left to my own devices with BY MR SMITH Q But do you recall looking at this 17 document if there were other opinions you got 18 from other SERE psychologists as suggested by 19 Exhibit Number 59 20 A Yes I don't specifically recall 21 this document but not to say I didn't see it 22 just don't remember at this point in time 23 Q So even though you don't recall the 24 document what about the subject matter that I'm 25 asking you about ACLU-RDI p 176 I Page 177 1 Do you recall if there were SERE 2 psychologists other than Mitchell and Jessen 3 who provided opinions to the CIA relating to 4 these enhanced interrogation techniques 5 A No to the best of my recollection 6 the only SERE psychologists I knew that were 7 providing advice were Drs Mitchell and Jessen 8 9 Q then Okay All right Let's move on And to the extent that JPRA came to the 10 conclusion that there were no long-term 11 psychological effects resulting from the use of 12 EITs you don't know what the source of that 13 agency's information was 14 A No 15 Q Okay 16 A You know I did probably know at 17 18 some point Q Not specifically What about generally I just can't remember now Okay Turn if you would to 19 Paragraph 48 which appears on the top of Page 9 20 of your declaration marked as Exhibit Number 45 21 Tell me when you are there 22 A I am there 23 Q Paragraph 48 is one sentence It 24 states It is my understanding that all EITs 25 were applied to Zubaydah consistent with the ACLU-RDI p 177 Page 178 1 August 1 2002 Bybee memo 2 Do you see that 3 A I do 4 Q What is the source of your 5 6 information for Paragraph Number 48 A Well a couple of things We had 7 sent one of our attorneys in the Office of 8 General Counsel to review the videotapes of the 9 interrogation of Zubaydah many hours of 10 videotapes 11 subsequently destroyed 12 These were videotapes that were And he returned to say as I am 13 going through them carefully that none of the 14 EITs -- all of the EITs applied to Zubaydah were 15 consistent with the Bybee memo 16 there were no unauthorized techniques 17 Q In other words And just so we are clear the Bybee 18 memo was the memo that served as the legal 19 authority to proceed with 11 of the 12 20 techniques is that correct 21 A Correct 22 Q Okay 23 And mock burials was the one that was removed 24 A That's correct 25 Q Okay ACLU-RDI p 178 Now I want to ask you about Page 179 1 high value detainees 2 3 You mentioned high value detainees in your testimony Do you recall that 4 A Yes 5 Q And do you know there were other 6 types of detainees right 7 A Right 8 Q There were medium value detainees 9 and low value detainees right 10 A Yes 11 Q Did you in your capacity as Counsel 12 for the CIA give advice to members in the field 13 about low value detainees and medium value 14 detainees 15 A I'm sure we did I don't recall 16 that I did myself but I'm sure lawyers my 17 lawyers at CTC did 18 19 Q Now I want to focus in on Mitchell and Jessen 20 21 Okay Were Mitchell and Jessen involved with high value detainees 22 A Yes 23 Q Do you know if they had any role 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 179 other than with respect to high value detainees A No My understanding was that they Page 180 1 were brought on and they were and they were used 2 exclusively on high value detainees 3 Q Okay Now you got this document 4 which was previously marked in the case as 5 Exhibit Number 17 6 you would please Pull it out for a second if 7 A 17 8 Q 17 9 A Jim if you could describe it I 10 11 could find it Q It is the 12 techniques that is in 12 the form of a cable but it is a cut and paste of 13 a memo that was put together by Dr Mitchell 14 MR HANNER 15 declaration as well 16 17 18 It is Exhibit C to the BY MR SMITH Q It was marked during your testimony today as Exhibit 17 so I want to be consistent 19 A Okay 20 Q Do you have it there 21 A I've used the one as my exhibit 22 starts -- 23 Q Okay 24 A -- unclassified for public release 25 Q Okay ACLU-RDI p 180 All right Sometime in the summer of It Page 181 1 2002 you were presented with this document were 2 you not 3 A Yes 4 Q And can you fix an approximate date 5 when you were presented with this document 6 A I it you know it is hard to tell 7 with the redactions whether I was presented with 8 it 9 Q Just give me your best estimate 10 A I was probably presented with it 11 either right prior or right after August 1st 12 see there is a reference to a July 8 2002 13 meeting So it was some time after that 14 But it was close It was around it 15 was near very near I suspect the time of the 16 Bybee memo 17 Q So Mr Rizzo Mr Bennett is 18 counting my minutes and I see that he has 19 signaled to me that I have 27 minutes left 20 21 22 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 181 I A If you need to go over a little Q You don't want to make that bit -- concession MR BENNETT You say that to a lawyer you are out of your mind Page 182 1 BY MR SMITH 2 Q Mr Rizzo stay with me on this 3 A Okay 4 Q You were presented this memo in 5 connection with Abu Zubaydah correct 6 A Yes 7 Q And Abu Zubaydah was -- what was his 8 category of detainee 9 A He was a high value detainee 10 Q And these these 12 techniques were 11 related to what kind of detainees 12 A High value detainees 13 Q And initially when you first looked 14 at them and you were asked to opine on the 15 legality of them it was solely for Abu Zubaydah 16 isn't that right 17 A That's correct 18 Q And then I think you testified that 19 you went to the Justice Department because you 20 wanted to get an opinion from the Justice 21 Department to protect people within the CIA about 22 the legality right 23 A Yes yes 24 Q And you ultimately got that Bybee 25 ACLU-RDI p 182 memo right Page 183 1 A I did 2 Q And then thereafter the these 3 techniques were expanded to be used on other high 4 value detainees is that correct 5 A Correct 6 Q During the period of time that you 7 were at the CIA and acting as counsel were these 8 techniques that are set forth in Exhibit 9 Number 17 ever expanded to be used on any 10 detainees other than high value detainees 11 A No 12 Q Okay 13 A I should note that Number 12 was a 14 mock burial 15 16 Q Right And that was eliminated And I think that was on the record 17 18 That -- And I want to go to I want to go to Exhibit Number 38 19 A Okay 20 Q And I want to talk about process 21 Okay 22 MR BENNETT 23 MR SMITH What is 38 38 is lays out the road 24 map for if we are going to use enhanced 25 interrogation techniques and other standard ACLU-RDI p 183 Page 184 1 techniques this is what the CIA wants 2 everybody to do after 3 BY MR SMITH 4 Q Do you have that exhibit before you 5 A I'm looking 6 Is this the January '03 7 MR HANNER 8 Yes it is Exhibit N to your declaration 9 MR BENNETT N 10 THE WITNESS Okay I have that 11 BY MR SMITH 12 Q And you are familiar with this 13 document 14 A Yes 15 Q And the reason you are familiar with 16 it in your capacity as Counsel for the CIA during 17 the time in question 18 A Yes 19 Q Mr Rizzo I want to just make a 20 couple of points here 21 about is architect 22 said you are the legal architect of the enhanced 23 interrogation program 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 184 A yes First I want to talk You I think in your book I think yes I think that is -- Page 185 1 2 Q Can you tell me what you meant by A Well I was the yeah I was the that 3 4 certainly the primary lawyer at CIA in the 5 position of leadership frankly the only lawyer 6 who was involved in the program from its 7 inception to its conclusion seven years later 8 Q 9 So let me ask you When you went to the Justice 10 Department to get their view on the legality of 11 these enhanced interrogation techniques if they 12 would have said no they are illegal what would 13 you have done 14 A I would have said thank you very 15 much and that would have been the end of that 16 We wouldn't be sitting here 17 18 19 20 Q Who was the architect then them or A Well I think I referred to myself you as the CIA's legal architect 21 22 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 185 Obviously the Justice Department is the ultimate legal arbiter Q Okay Now I want to talk about your understanding of process By January of 2003 obviously there Page 186 1 were procedures that were now in writing as 2 embodiments in Exhibit 38 is that right 3 A Correct 4 Q Were these procedures actually being 5 followed prior to the preparation of Exhibit 6 Number 38 7 A Yes 8 Q Okay 9 A Yes 10 Q But someone made the decision to 11 memorialize them in a document 12 A Yes that's correct 13 Q Who made that decision 14 A I believe actually it was made by 15 January 2003 we did have a new General Counsel 16 Mr Moller 17 Q Okay 18 A I believe to give him credit he 19 was the one he had arrived shortly before that 20 in November 21 get the existing procedures down in writing 22 23 Q He said we should get all of this I see who made this decision 24 A No 25 Q I see ACLU-RDI p 186 So it wasn't Dr Mitchell So let's go to the second Page 187 1 page of Exhibit Number 38 2 3 Do you see where it talks about permissible interrogation techniques 4 A Right 5 Q And it says Unless otherwise 6 approved by headquarters CIA officer and other 7 personnel acting on behalf of CIA may use only 8 permissible interrogation techniques 9 Do you see that 10 A Yes 11 Q Was Dr Mitchell part of this 12 approval process 13 A The approval process for the -- 14 Q Where it says unless otherwise 15 approved by headquarters CIA officers or other 16 personnel acting on behalf of the CIA -- well 17 actually I misread that 18 Let me start again Unless otherwise approved by 19 headquarters CIA officers and other personnel 20 acting on behalf of the CIA may use only 21 permissible interrogation techniques 22 Do you see that 23 A I do 24 Q So headquarters had to approve the 25 ACLU-RDI p 187 techniques right Page 188 1 A That's correct 2 Q Okay 3 Dr Mitchell didn't approve the techniques right 4 A No 5 Q Dr Jessen didn't approve the 6 techniques right 7 A No 8 Q Okay 9 And then if you read on it says what the permissible techniques are Do you 10 see that 11 A I see that 12 Q Now who decided what the standard 13 techniques were that were permissible within the 14 meaning of this memo 15 A Well CTC did 16 Q Headquarters did right 17 A Headquarters CTC 18 Q Correct 19 A No CTC 20 Q Right Not Dr Mitchell right When you say CTC you mean 21 that people that were responsible for running the 22 day-to-day affairs of the Counter Terrorism 23 Center right 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 188 A Staff officers in the Counter Terrorism Center Page 189 1 2 Q And so the record is crystal clear not Dr Mitchell right 3 A Correct 4 Q And not Dr Jessen 5 A That's correct 6 Q Okay And then if you look at the 7 standard techniques there are a series of them 8 called out 9 And I will mention some Isolation 10 sleep deprivation not to exceed 72 hours 11 reduced caloric intake so long as the amount is 12 calculated to maintain the general health of the 13 detainee deprivation of reading material use of 14 loud music or white noise 15 there 16 17 Let me stop right You can read them as well as I can right 18 A Right 19 Q Who determined that these techniques 20 were the techniques that would be used as 21 standard techniques 22 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 189 Is this headquarters again A It was headquarters It wasn't me But it was headquarters yes Q And who from headquarters can you Page 190 1 tell me was involved in this decision-making 2 process 3 4 A Well again it would be CTC officers and management 5 Q Not Dr Mitchell correct 6 A Not to my knowledge 7 Q And not Dr Jessen right 8 A That's correct 9 Q Okay Now reading on it makes 10 reference to enhanced techniques 11 that Do you see 12 A I do 13 Q And then you will see that there are 14 a series of enhanced techniques that are 15 identified in here right 16 A Correct 17 Q And it says just so the record is 18 clear Enhanced techniques are techniques that 19 do incorporate physical or psychological pressure 20 beyond standard techniques 21 specific enhanced technique must be approved by 22 headquarters in advance and may be employed only 23 by approved interrogators for use with the 24 specific detainee with appropriate medical and 25 psychological participation in the process ACLU-RDI p 190 The use of each Page 191 1 Do you see that 2 A I do 3 Q Who put this process in place 4 A Again it would be CTC officers and 5 management 6 Q Correct 7 A No 8 Q Who would decide which medical 9 10 Not Dr Jessen right doctor would participate in the enhanced interrogations Headquarters 11 A Headquarters yes 12 Q And would headquarters also decide 13 which psychological doctor whether it be a 14 psychiatrist or a psychologist would 15 participate 16 A That is correct 17 Q I want to ask you further about -- 18 so is it fair to say that every decision about 19 when and how and to whom these techniques were 20 going to be utilized was made by headquarters 21 A That is fair to say yes 22 Q Okay Now in addition to that if 23 you read through this because I only have about 24 18 more minutes it talks about process for who 25 can stop the enhanced interrogation techniques ACLU-RDI p 191 Page 192 1 Do you see it in there 2 A Yes if you could direct me 3 Q Sure 4 A Okay 5 Q And just read it to yourself 6 Go to Paragraph 2 you read it 7 A Yes 8 Q And again this procedure was 9 Have determined by headquarters right 10 A That's correct 11 Q And if you look at interrogation 12 personnel in Paragraph 3 all done by 13 headquarters Right 14 A That's correct 15 Q All controlled by headquarters 16 correct 17 A Correct 18 Q And then if you look at finally Item 19 Number 4 and 5 5 dealing with recordkeeping and 20 4 dealing with approvals required all again 21 directed and orchestrated by headquarters right 22 A Correct 23 Q So in fairness was it your 24 understanding that if enhanced interrogation 25 techniques were to be used one they would be ACLU-RDI p 192 Page 193 1 done only on a high value detainee 2 A Correct 3 Q Two they would be done only after 4 headquarters decided which of the 11 techniques 5 were to be used on which day for how many 6 times is that correct 7 A That's correct 8 Q And to the extent that the people 9 out in the field even if they wanted to stop 10 doing the enhanced interrogation techniques if 11 headquarters directed that they continue 12 headquarters expected that direction to be 13 followed 14 A That's correct 15 Q And it was always that way during 16 the period of time 2002 whenever this started 17 right up through the end of 2004 Correct 18 A To the end of 2004 yes 19 Q Okay 20 21 22 MR BENNETT 25 ACLU-RDI p 193 You know -- BY MR SMITH Q 23 24 In fairness -- I will stop the in fairness MR BENNETT Yes BY MR SMITH Q It is true that Drs Mitchell and Page 194 1 Jessen weren't the architect of this program at 2 all weren't they 3 4 A Q The agency directed every facet of it along the way isn't that right 7 A Yes 8 Q Okay 9 It was an agency program the CTC program 5 6 No it was CTC And those 12 techniques that are embodied in the memo that Mitchell that was 10 cut and pasted for Mitchell marked as 11 Exhibit Number 17 do you know how long those 12 techniques have been around 13 A You mean at the agency 14 Q Do you know if waterboarding was 15 used during World War II 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 A Apparently some forms of it were Q Okay yes Do you know if these other techniques have been around for decades A I understand that a number of them have been yes Q Okay Do you know which ones weren't 24 A No 25 Q Okay ACLU-RDI p 194 Or or -- No Go back to Exhibit Number 45 Page 195 1 There is a couple of other paragraphs I just want 2 to clean up 3 A What is 45 4 Q Yes 5 MR HANNER 6 MR BENNETT 7 8 It is the declaration Of his declaration BY MR SMITH Q 9 Yes that is 45 MR SMITH Thank you Mr Bennett 10 I am working this clock hard I want to 11 report to you 12 MR BENNETT 13 much 14 BY MR SMITH 15 Q I appreciate it very Paragraph 69 appears on Page 12 Do 16 you see where it says Gul Rahman Rahman was 17 not classified as an HVD 18 Do you see that 19 A Yes 20 Q By way of background Mr Rahman 21 died while in captivity in a black cell right 22 A At Cobalt yes 23 Q Okay 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 195 And are aware that his estate is a plaintiff in this action A I guess I know that yes Page 196 1 Q Okay And is it correct that after 2 Rahman died you became knowledgeable about the 3 facts and circumstances relating to Rahman's 4 captivity because of the death 5 A Yes 6 Q And in the course of learning about 7 those facts and circumstances is that when you 8 learned that he was not a high value detainee 9 A Yes 10 Q Okay 11 And is that the basis for the factual allegation that appears in Paragraph 69 12 A Yes 13 Q And would the same be true with 14 respect to Paragraph 70 which states Rahman was 15 not part of the EIT program 16 A That's correct 17 Q Okay You learned that as a result 18 of the inquiry that was done by you and others 19 resulting from Rahman's death 20 A Correct 21 Q And then finally Paragraphs 77 and 22 78 make reference to a report that is entitled 23 the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence's 24 Study of the Central Intelligence Agency's 25 Detention and Interrogation Program ACLU-RDI p 196 Page 197 1 Do you see that 2 A I do 3 Q And we refer to it as the SSCI 4 report S-S-C-I 5 the purposes of this deposition Can you call it that too for 6 A I will call it that 7 Q Okay Do you see in Paragraph 77 8 you say The SSCI report is an errant 9 inaccurate one-sided unremitting wholesale 10 assault on the CIA's EIT program 11 Do you see that 12 A I do 13 Q Can you tell us why you said that 14 A Well in terms of one-sided it was 15 an investigation that took place over four years 16 Apparently reviewed millions of documents but 17 was conducted solely by the one side one 18 partisan side of the committee 19 And during at least for me the 20 biggest evidence of the one sidedness is that 21 none of us who had been involved in the program 22 including me not once during those four years 23 was ever asked -- was ever interviewed by any of 24 the SSCI investigators 25 ACLU-RDI p 197 Q And did you ever come to understand Page 198 1 2 why none of you were interviewed A Well I had my my -- my conclusion 3 was that they started off with their conclusions 4 already in their head 5 worthless immoral 6 no -- and the rest of the time they were building 7 towards solidifying and supporting that forgone 8 conclusion 9 Q That the program was And they there was really I see And are there instances in 10 the report that you could cite where the 11 information is as you describe it errant 12 inaccurate one-sided 13 A Yes 14 Q Okay 15 And is it fair to say -- strike that 16 Is it true that Paragraph 78 through 17 83 cite some of the instances in the SSCI report 18 where you believe that that report is inaccurate 19 errant et cetera 20 A That's correct correct 21 Q Okay 22 23 Let's change subject matters You were asked questions about learned helplessness Do you remember that 24 A Yes 25 Q Turn if you would to Paragraph 18 ACLU-RDI p 198 Page 199 1 of Exhibit Number 46 2 A 46 is -- oh here it is 3 Q Yes it is the same document -- I'm 4 sorry I said 46 5 6 A right 7 I meant 45 Oh my declaration I got it Forgive me Okay All I'm looking at what paragraph Q Paragraph 18 which appears on 8 Page 4 In that paragraph you talk about learned 9 helplessness Do you see that 10 A Right Right 11 Q And if I'm reading it correctly 12 you attribute that theory to someone other than 13 Drs Mitchell and Jessen 14 A That's right 15 Q Okay A Well I mean first of all as I -- 16 Tell me what you meant by that 17 18 let me look This is a meeting at the White 19 House This is a meeting at the White 20 House 21 Yes Yes well I wasn't -- first of all 22 Dr Mitchell and Dr Jessen were not with me at 23 that meeting at the White House 24 strictly CTC attorneys 25 ACLU-RDI p 199 It was just And my recollection is that they Page 200 1 as I say here outlined the theory of learned 2 helplessness and named a named a psychologist 3 whose name escapes me but which who I am 4 certain is neither Dr Mitchell nor Dr Jessen 5 Q Okay And do you remember what you 6 were told about that theory by that doctor whose 7 name you can't remember 8 A Well as I said earlier my layman's 9 understanding is that when a detainee reaches the 10 point of self-recognition that further resistance 11 to questioning further prevarication is useless 12 and that therefore he becomes compliant 13 14 Q Turn if you would to what has been marked previously as Exhibit 44 15 A 44 16 Q Yes 17 A Again that is what 18 Q It is a it is a document that So I can -- 19 Mr Warden redacted so much of that it is 20 impossible for me to say what it is 21 could be kind enough to tell us 22 MR HANNER 23 THE WITNESS 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 200 Maybe he Here you go Okay I've got it BY MR SMITH Q Now you were asked a number of Page 201 1 questions about this document Do you remember 2 A I do yes 3 Q Did you ever see this document 4 before today 5 6 7 A not I have no idea whether I saw it or I mean it is virtually unrecognizable Q I understand Well it is good to 8 know your lawyers are out there protecting your 9 information 10 But looking at it in its present 11 form is it correct to say that you cannot 12 identify this document 13 A Yes that's correct 14 Q Okay 15 of the document 16 A No 17 Q You don't know the reason the 18 And you don't know the author document was created 19 A No 20 Q You have no idea if the information 21 that appears in the document is accurate 22 A No 23 Q You are not saying it is inaccurate 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 201 Without any -- but you can't say that it is A No That's correct Page 202 1 Q Okay You have no idea of the 2 circumstances under which this document was 3 created 4 A Correct 5 Q And if you turn to exhibit sorry 6 the same exhibit but Bates page U S 1581 which 7 is three or four from the back 8 questions about the individual that is identified 9 there You were asked Do you remember 10 A Yes 11 Q And reference is made in this 12 document to this individual undergoing EITs 13 right 14 A Right 15 Q And you don't know if that happened 16 correct 17 A Right 18 Q If it did you don't know why 19 Yes correct 20 A Correct 21 Q Okay 22 And the same would be true if you turned to Bates page 1567 23 A Yes yes 24 Q Okay 25 ACLU-RDI p 202 The same Let me ask you this because you may have alluded to this earlier in your Page 203 1 testimony 2 During the course of your 3 participation in these black sites and these 4 various forms of detainees did you learn from 5 time to time that there were instances where 6 people at black sites holding low or medium value 7 detainees were using enhanced interrogation 8 techniques without authorization and without 9 following the procedure that had been laid out by 10 the CIA 11 12 A Yes That came to my attention That happened from time to time 13 Q Okay And were those the people 14 who did that they were the people responsible 15 for running the black sites 16 A Well running the prisons that they 17 the Cobalt and as I said earlier my vernacular 18 black sites were the places where the EITs took 19 place 20 21 Q Okay So these were prisons where medium value and low value detainees were kept 22 A Correct 23 Q And there were instances where EITs 24 were applied to these detainees but in direct 25 violation of CIA orders ACLU-RDI p 203 Page 204 1 A Yes certainly unauthorized 2 techniques yes 3 Q And isn't it true that Dr Mitchell 4 and Dr Jessen had absolutely nothing to do with 5 that 6 A Not as far as I know 7 Q Okay Did you ever come across any 8 evidence that they even knew about these actions 9 being done these unauthorized actions 10 A I don't recall ever hearing that no 11 Q Okay 12 Turn if you would to what was previously marked as Exhibit Number 35 13 MR SMITH 14 left on the disk Mr Rizzo MR BENNETT 15 There is three minutes Well just remember 16 Abraham Lincoln's Gettysburg address was 17 three minutes MR SMITH 18 19 22 23 Thank you for reminding me THE WITNESS 20 21 So if he can do it you can What is 35 again BY MR SMITH Q Exhibit 35 is a memo about the meeting that you had with Secretary Rice 24 A Oh that yes yes 25 Q Here is what I want to ask you ACLU-RDI p 204 Page 205 1 about Do you remember that meeting 2 A Oh yes vividly 3 Q Do you remember if Dr Mitchell at 4 that meeting said to Secretary Rice that he 5 didn't believe in nudity 6 7 8 9 A That he Dr Mitchell didn't believe in it Q He did not believe in it wanted it to stop 10 A I don't remember that no 11 Q Okay Just so the record is clear 12 can you sit here today and say if he were to 13 testify to that under oath can you say that you 14 don't think that is true 15 16 17 A way or the other Q 18 19 22 23 Okay MR BENNETT Any kind of nudity at all Doctor 20 21 No I just don't remember it one MR SMITH Not by detainees in connection to the action brought by the ACLU BY MR SMITH Q Do you know Mr Rizzo if the 24 guards determined how long the prisoners would 25 remain awake at the prison ACLU-RDI p 205 Page 206 1 A That the guards would determine -- 2 Q It was the guards who made that 3 determination 4 A I don't believe they did 5 Q Okay 6 All right let's go off the record for a second 7 8 No THE VIDEOGRAPHER 2 56 a m off the record 9 Recess taken -- 2 56 p m 10 After recess -- 3 00 p m 11 THE VIDEOGRAPHER We are now on the 12 record the beginning of Videotape Number 3 13 of the deposition of John Rizzo 14 now is 3 00 p m 15 16 17 The time BY MR SMITH Q Mr Rizzo just a couple more areas and we will have you out of here 18 You testified during your 19 examination with counsel for the ACLU that there 20 were refinements made to the program 21 remember that Do you 22 A Yes 23 Q And the program we are talking about 24 the is enhanced interrogation techniques that 25 were used for high value detainees ACLU-RDI p 206 Page 207 1 A Correct 2 Q Okay Now who participated in the 3 decision-making process with respect to those 4 changes 5 A Well I participated 6 Q Yes 7 A And I I actually took the lead for 8 the agency in that effort at the direction of 9 the CIA Director at the time Michael Hayden 10 And I had the discussions with 11 appropriate CTC personnel I remember the Chief 12 of the CTC about you know what kind of 13 techniques do they continue to deem essential 14 Things of that nature 15 16 17 Q Okay And how many times did you engage in that effort A Was it a periodic review Well it was -- no it was intense 18 I mean it was over a I would say a six-month 19 period where this was all being reviewed from 20 top to bottom 21 Q And is it correct to say that 22 neither Dr Mitchell nor Dr Jessen were a part 23 of the decision-making process about the 24 refinements that were going to be made 25 ACLU-RDI p 207 A No that is correct I don't recall Page 208 1 actually talking to them about this 2 Q You didn't even confer with them 3 A I don't recall 4 talking to CTC people yes 5 6 I do remember Q Sure That would be Mr Rodriguez and his staff 7 A 8 the time 9 Q And the and the new head of CTC at Okay And then finally you said 10 that there was a meeting that you had with 11 Mr Chertoff Do you remember that 12 A Yes 13 Q And in the course of that meeting 14 you had raised the subject of advanced immunity 15 right 16 A Right 17 Q So you get a declination from the 18 government before conduct occurs as insulation 19 if you will for the government being able to 20 charge at a later date 21 A Yes 22 Q How many times did you have that 23 discussion with him 24 A Once 25 Q Did you ever have the subject matter ACLU-RDI p 208 Page 209 1 of that discussion with anyone else from the 2 Department of Justice 3 4 5 6 A No I mean Chertoff shot it down quite conclusively so I just let it go Q So it came up one time and it never came up again 7 A Yes and it was my idea only 8 Q It was your idea only 9 10 MR SMITH MR LADIN MR BENNETT MR LADIN 16 18 Oh yes sure I didn't know I was a judge but go ahead 15 17 Can I just ask one final question 13 14 We have no further questions of the witness thank you Mr Rizzo 11 12 Okay In a way you are EXAMINATION BY MR LADIN Q So you testified earlier that you 19 did not personally speak with the defendants' 20 lawyers crafting your declaration is that right 21 A That's correct 22 Q But your declaration uses as 23 exhibits documents that were produced as part of 24 this litigation is that right 25 ACLU-RDI p 209 A Well they were produced -- they Page 210 1 were given to me by my counsel 2 came out of the litigation 3 Q I assume they And do you have any knowledge of 4 whether Dr Mitchell and Dr Jessen's lawyers 5 were part of the process of crafting your 6 declaration even if you didn't speak with them 7 personally 8 9 10 11 12 A No I mean I relied on the guidance from my attorneys Q Okay So you don't know whether they were consulted A No I don't 13 MR LADIN 14 MR BENNETT 15 Okay That is all I very much appreciate 16 THE VIDEOGRAPHER 17 the video deposition of John Rizzo 18 now is 3 04 p m 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ACLU-RDI p 210 This concludes The time Whereupon signature having been waived the deposition concluded at 3 04 p m Page 211 1 CERTIFICATE OF COURT REPORTER 2 3 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 4 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 5 I LORI J GOODIN the reporter before 6 whom the foregoing deposition was taken do 7 hereby certify that the witness whose testimony 8 appears in the foregoing deposition was sworn by 9 me that the testimony of said witness was taken 10 by me in machine shorthand and thereafter 11 transcribed by computer-aided transcription that 12 said deposition is a true record of the testimony 13 given by said witness that I am neither counsel 14 for related to nor employed by any of the 15 parties to the action in which this deposition 16 was taken and further that I am not a relative 17 or employee of any attorney or counsel employed by 18 the parties hereto or financially or otherwise 19 interested in the outcome of this action 20 21 ___________________________ 22 LORI J GOODIN 23 Notary Public in and for the 24 District of Columbia 25 ACLU-RDI p 211 My Commission expires May 14 2021 Page 1 A Abd 89 25 92 25 95 16 97 17 98 4 abdominal 93 1 Abdullah 1 4 8 7 102 18 129 11 135 8 ability 14 23 58 15 137 5 able 51 2 134 19 208 19 Abraham 204 16 absence 94 22 absolutely 50 24 55 20 56 20 58 18 58 21 63 1 94 3 96 9 163 9 12 204 4 Abu 6 20 7 3 5 7 18 25 21 23 28 16 29 4 5 23 30 1 35 9 52 15 65 1 7 65 10 11 19 73 25 74 7 85 21 97 17 102 12 126 6 131 14 134 3 135 6 18 136 8 137 13 156 20 21 156 24 182 5 7 15 abuse 87 20 abuses 87 19 160 4 160 14 162 8 abusive 153 2 18 153 20 21 accomplish 58 16 account 69 18 147 18 accuracy 149 15 accurate 74 1 93 18 20 94 3 106 5 10 11 112 14 22 119 18 120 13 135 3 136 8 23 148 2 149 12 155 20 ACLU-RDI p 212 201 21 accurately 169 2 acknowledged 91 12 ACLU 12 25 171 14 205 21 206 19 acquired 10 17 acronym 20 11 acted 143 8 acting 173 23 183 7 187 7 16 20 action 75 2 195 24 205 21 211 15 19 actionable 126 25 127 4 129 11 actions 204 8 9 activities 67 1 acts 121 18 actual 152 3 172 17 addition 133 5 191 22 additional 99 16 105 25 110 13 131 6 132 8 22 133 22 address 204 16 addressed 145 24 adjectives 25 1 administered 24 25 77 18 78 2 11 88 15 administration 119 14 Administrator 1 24 admissible 168 21 advance 190 22 advanced 131 17 208 14 advice 59 23 177 7 179 12 advised 40 2 advisor 22 7 affairs 18 5 188 22 afraid 63 13 afrey@gibbonsla 2 19 afternoon 166 14 agency 5 6 10 14 11 11 25 16 49 13 49 17 50 17 19 54 20 68 19 140 14 142 1 2 143 15 172 2 194 3 5 13 207 8 agency's 177 13 196 24 aggressive 130 14 132 3 agnostic 50 3 5 ago 15 17 20 3 79 20 149 16 agree 53 22 91 4 116 17 117 18 121 24 146 9 148 1 3 14 171 3 174 23 175 15 agreements 12 1 ahead 24 11 26 9 45 15 16 46 8 54 3 61 24 79 8 101 3 123 3 124 6 128 7 132 20 138 10 13 14 149 24 150 11 165 9 209 14 Ahmed 95 17 al 1 4 allegation 196 11 allegations 27 17 allow 33 12 156 18 164 5 14 allowed 120 17 alluded 202 25 alternative 74 22 75 1 alternatively 133 6 al-Karim 89 25 92 25 95 17 97 17 98 4 102 18 al-Shoroeiya 95 17 amend 168 4 AMERICA 211 3 American 2 7 27 8 27 15 amount 70 19 92 17 189 11 analysis 26 7 28 24 146 3 Andrew 4 16 9 25 andrew warden 4 21 Ann 3 9 9 17 announcement 120 3 answer 11 21 12 3 12 12 14 16 23 3 23 4 46 17 54 2 59 20 61 10 78 18 101 16 122 5 123 12 15 144 16 149 24 165 3 10 165 18 19 answered 15 10 36 12 41 3 answers 14 20 35 5 anticipated 12 11 apart 102 5 apologize 34 10 65 25 apparently 143 1 194 16 197 16 appear 23 5 24 12 65 4 20 88 21 91 25 99 5 105 18 108 12 appearance 8 23 APPEARANCES 2 1 3 1 4 1 5 1 appeared 131 10 appears 34 19 23 35 13 39 25 47 3 64 13 73 9 81 5 85 13 86 14 92 3 96 10 108 15 112 15 134 10 13 142 17 172 13 173 18 177 19 195 15 196 11 199 7 201 21 211 8 application 132 18 applied 91 14 177 25 178 14 203 24 apply 13 25 104 1 110 20 applying 145 9 appreciate 12 17 29 17 48 15 95 8 138 4 166 10 168 12 195 12 210 15 appropriate 104 2 190 24 207 11 appropriately 75 20 approval 58 10 59 9 17 60 13 14 60 25 85 9 10 11 89 8 91 20 187 12 187 13 approvals 53 1 70 6 174 11 192 20 approve 56 8 10 187 24 188 2 5 approved 61 7 65 19 83 3 91 13 91 17 92 6 8 94 24 95 10 14 14 97 7 18 24 108 23 109 1 17 160 6 187 6 15 18 190 21 23 approving 159 23 approximate 181 4 April 18 22 89 25 aquerns@blankr 3 16 arbiter 185 22 architect 184 21 22 185 17 20 194 1 architects 68 18 Page 2 69 4 6 10 75 25 area 22 17 areas 100 14 206 16 arising 117 11 arrived 49 1 186 19 article 7 10 121 16 152 19 21 articulated 156 9 aside 27 22 59 8 141 19 asked 12 11 15 18 30 2 7 25 47 10 56 18 59 3 4 62 14 74 16 75 17 77 16 21 78 1 101 17 141 3 171 8 13 182 14 197 23 198 22 200 25 202 7 asking 13 20 14 10 29 11 54 18 84 19 89 19 20 96 6 102 4 137 17 141 16 164 11 175 5 6 176 25 aspect 31 18 138 1 aspects 36 16 21 assault 197 10 assertions 142 18 assess 33 12 135 4 136 24 137 6 assessed 129 10 131 15 132 6 134 4 assessing 47 1 assessment 7 4 6 8 38 14 19 42 20 48 4 108 13 124 1 129 17 130 19 155 11 156 15 162 4 169 22 25 170 19 assessments 63 12 140 19 ACLU-RDI p 213 Assignment 1 25 assistance 167 13 174 14 assistant 53 12 associated 17 17 73 24 assume 14 17 29 8 35 1 2 94 23 25 175 20 210 1 assuming 71 21 assumption 100 25 125 23 assumptions 35 5 attached 167 8 9 attack 28 21 155 6 156 13 157 7 attention 82 10 87 5 93 2 103 13 104 4 107 1 8 154 15 18 173 17 174 1 203 11 attorney 10 13 12 25 16 19 53 12 147 20 211 17 attorneys 15 23 16 1 38 23 100 8 100 13 128 4 178 7 199 24 210 9 attribute 199 12 August 7 4 6 8 43 23 55 16 61 19 127 9 14 18 19 130 17 132 1 178 1 181 11 author 201 14 authority 166 10 178 19 authorization 64 11 89 16 138 1 203 8 authorizations 89 11 authorize 56 6 authorized 55 9 65 7 70 20 71 7 85 24 86 4 87 11 88 18 94 7 111 14 available 135 4 136 24 140 22 Avenue 3 22 4 18 avoid 94 25 142 21 Avram 2 13 9 5 awake 77 23 149 2 205 25 aware 27 11 29 2 29 10 30 16 35 23 52 16 17 59 7 11 59 11 15 22 70 10 75 18 122 24 131 13 134 5 135 24 154 10 159 21 162 16 195 23 a m 1 14 8 13 43 12 43 13 14 15 206 7 a k a 95 17 27 1 6 13 69 19 86 6 109 19 139 25 140 23 151 12 20 165 4 basically 56 18 basis 45 10 95 15 96 18 98 3 99 20 100 19 171 7 196 10 Bates 39 23 44 17 51 3 84 8 10 13 92 18 110 9 112 9 114 8 125 9 126 8 126 9 134 24 139 2 16 140 7 145 3 173 3 202 6 202 22 bearing 60 16 173 3 Beckman 5 14 10 6 began 50 1 128 9 153 13 B begged 133 7 B 5 3 134 18 back 21 8 24 1 beginning 8 5 30 9 28 16 31 19 33 10 31 9 48 25 68 12 35 23 36 3 38 21 71 7 85 21 103 8 52 13 25 54 23 116 18 146 11 55 8 56 22 58 2 151 1 6 206 12 61 14 70 6 78 23 begins 35 12 49 9 79 1 7 80 25 73 16 82 13 23 85 10 90 17 97 9 91 4 96 9 115 15 98 17 105 16 116 12 140 14 110 3 115 10 behalf 9 8 9 11 14 117 24 118 3 9 15 17 19 22 125 1 25 129 7 11 10 3 168 11 187 7 130 20 25 134 23 187 16 20 134 24 140 4 believe 15 24 19 8 150 25 153 8 19 11 20 4 22 14 156 14 159 4 30 15 19 34 9 9 194 25 202 7 34 16 36 22 44 25 background 158 3 51 6 55 17 56 12 195 20 63 4 7 64 4 67 5 backgrounds 69 12 74 3 81 14 82 23 base 174 11 93 25 99 7 104 11 based 20 5 21 1 104 12 107 24 110 6 112 21 113 6 8 115 20 117 4 13 119 25 120 17 124 19 136 15 143 21 21 145 9 21 148 12 152 6 160 13 186 14 18 198 18 205 5 7 8 206 4 believed 52 23 120 6 135 11 18 143 1 146 5 believes 51 25 162 18 164 19 believing 115 25 Bellinger 6 25 121 5 12 150 5 14 benefits 146 4 Bennett 3 20 8 25 9 1 14 4 15 10 17 19 23 4 25 24 11 26 9 29 7 29 17 20 32 4 33 5 20 25 34 4 34 11 35 2 4 36 12 37 17 38 5 39 12 18 41 3 17 41 21 23 44 4 21 45 9 15 46 2 7 48 6 12 25 50 4 51 11 14 53 24 54 3 57 6 9 59 19 60 6 61 20 23 62 4 71 20 73 13 77 1 78 15 17 79 6 82 5 86 19 88 3 93 8 94 13 95 1 6 96 15 99 19 25 100 16 100 20 24 104 22 105 2 5 112 6 114 20 122 3 6 123 3 11 14 18 23 124 6 127 13 17 137 16 23 138 3 5 138 10 13 144 15 Page 3 149 23 150 11 152 18 158 17 162 20 24 163 3 163 10 16 164 16 165 2 5 9 13 19 166 4 7 9 181 17 181 24 183 22 184 9 193 20 23 195 6 9 12 204 15 205 18 209 13 210 14 best 18 8 21 5 48 16 61 11 108 7 108 24 122 23 177 5 181 9 better 49 13 123 22 beyond 99 17 100 17 109 16 190 20 big 17 20 117 25 125 4 biggest 62 18 197 20 biographies 96 10 98 18 bios 96 10 bit 181 21 black 44 2 18 45 21 52 13 63 23 64 6 64 9 81 18 85 10 85 19 86 10 176 9 195 21 203 3 6 15 203 18 blank 1 17 3 4 11 8 15 17 65 24 174 13 Bless 112 5 board 131 8 133 9 Bob 8 25 body 104 4 154 10 bolted 78 8 book 6 18 24 15 39 18 48 9 51 7 51 16 16 68 1 72 2 74 12 127 11 127 23 128 1 5 ACLU-RDI p 214 134 8 158 24 159 3 184 21 bottom 40 15 46 5 74 24 77 3 79 11 131 4 140 11 13 147 5 153 5 207 20 box 63 5 65 1 break 15 2 43 8 103 1 breathing 131 9 briefing 19 3 20 4 67 21 68 16 69 1 80 12 bring 107 1 bringing 72 11 154 18 Broad 2 8 Brooks 4 4 9 13 brooks hanner@ 4 11 brought 132 23 154 14 180 1 205 21 Bruce 8 8 bug 63 5 64 25 building 198 6 built 69 15 bullet 116 14 burial 25 12 28 9 55 10 13 19 57 18 57 24 65 3 183 14 burials 178 22 Bybee 43 23 61 19 62 11 15 149 12 178 1 15 17 181 16 182 24 107 14 108 12 14 109 2 6 111 2 6 114 8 126 19 129 9 130 17 131 25 132 5 173 18 174 2 180 12 cables 136 14 173 24 calculated 189 12 call 12 4 37 6 165 20 197 4 6 called 11 4 55 16 128 11 21 172 1 175 8 189 8 caloric 189 11 capable 137 13 capacity 179 11 184 16 captivity 17 17 18 10 195 21 196 4 capture 18 25 25 20 14 62 18 91 11 captured 19 1 62 15 career 10 13 18 1 7 carefully 175 7 178 13 carried 51 2 87 4 87 13 case 8 11 10 3 8 13 14 15 8 13 20 47 3 89 17 20 98 15 99 13 101 12 13 18 108 23 136 7 173 1 180 4 C cases 91 15 94 11 C 130 8 180 14 97 16 cable 7 12 34 19 categorical 49 18 37 21 38 16 43 19 categories 11 12 15 44 7 13 15 17 category 182 8 45 4 52 7 9 10 cause 41 16 45 7 89 10 24 25 caused 137 5 103 24 106 16 ceiling 78 9 121 25 122 19 149 3 cell 195 21 cells 122 25 124 3 center 2 16 18 23 19 10 31 1 73 21 188 23 25 Central 5 6 10 14 11 11 196 24 ceremonial 120 3 certain 66 6 94 2 100 22 110 20 200 4 certainly 18 11 22 11 23 18 37 2 75 5 109 5 150 2 185 4 204 1 certainty 32 1 CERTIFICATE 211 1 certify 211 7 cetera 198 19 chain 78 8 change 74 16 110 21 112 12 25 171 8 198 21 changed 66 4 70 8 102 1 143 4 changes 70 18 143 11 14 145 19 145 22 207 4 characterization 24 19 96 13 characterize 161 16 162 10 charge 208 20 Chertoff 53 13 54 8 208 11 209 3 Chief 5 3 19 10 207 11 CIA 5 14 10 16 24 16 20 17 13 16 20 18 19 25 30 22 31 25 33 2 36 23 49 21 25 59 23 60 2 11 17 62 15 67 6 15 75 14 19 77 16 22 78 1 81 25 87 20 90 18 91 9 92 24 93 5 93 13 94 6 11 96 19 102 10 103 19 106 5 113 19 116 2 12 116 17 117 18 119 19 125 1 140 1 4 141 3 147 12 148 15 150 21 156 18 158 25 159 18 170 13 14 15 173 23 177 3 179 12 182 21 183 7 184 1 16 185 4 187 6 7 15 187 16 19 20 203 10 25 207 9 CIA's 6 11 11 13 93 22 95 18 97 11 97 21 98 3 4 11 99 4 8 113 13 115 10 21 117 9 117 15 149 22 159 7 185 20 197 10 circumstances 40 4 196 3 7 202 2 cite 198 10 17 Civil 2 7 4 14 17 claim 133 22 clarification 158 20 clarified 120 24 clarify 36 20 classification 6 11 10 24 11 10 119 11 classified 10 20 11 15 23 12 4 149 12 195 17 clean 124 4 195 2 cleanliness 123 1 clear 13 6 37 25 73 20 156 8 8 Page 4 175 25 178 17 189 1 190 18 205 11 clearly 162 8 clients 49 22 clock 195 10 close 28 10 181 14 closely 116 24 cloth 106 17 CLR 1 23 Cobalt 64 14 16 81 5 8 13 15 83 14 16 84 22 85 14 16 24 86 1 86 4 13 16 24 87 4 13 106 1 109 22 110 13 23 111 11 14 112 13 113 2 195 22 203 17 code 176 5 code's 17 6 codified 85 1 86 3 Cody 5 5 10 5 coercive 28 18 60 3 60 12 19 colleagues 13 1 collective 47 10 colloquy 75 15 Columbia 4 6 211 4 24 combined 121 13 147 22 148 9 150 6 come 15 22 18 18 19 13 30 5 31 1 51 1 52 24 70 6 154 1 197 25 204 7 coming 28 21 comment 132 7 15 comments 7 11 115 21 Commission 211 25 committee 72 16 ACLU-RDI p 215 196 23 197 18 Common 121 15 communicate 133 25 146 11 15 communicated 36 18 57 5 12 83 3 145 16 communicating 71 16 communications 38 21 compare 35 18 104 13 compared 26 22 complete 35 5 161 4 15 completed 106 23 completely 25 25 completion 55 22 57 2 compliance 64 10 135 5 136 25 137 6 compliant 124 21 131 16 132 6 134 4 135 9 136 1 200 12 complicated 166 1 complimentary 72 3 complying 124 24 136 10 137 15 142 22 components 91 18 compute 84 9 computer-aided 211 11 concern 12 10 14 48 14 72 13 73 11 73 20 23 74 5 80 15 119 7 126 3 144 12 20 145 15 145 23 concerned 31 13 71 18 21 24 142 20 143 24 concerns 58 25 59 1 72 7 79 20 118 22 143 4 concession 181 23 conclude 158 7 concluded 63 13 171 20 172 9 210 20 concludes 210 16 conclusion 31 6 12 40 12 91 12 117 10 120 16 170 23 172 18 21 177 10 185 7 198 2 8 conclusions 198 3 conclusively 209 4 conduct 28 23 64 9 67 7 208 18 conducted 21 22 72 4 169 24 170 19 197 17 confer 208 2 confessions 27 7 12 27 15 confinement 93 2 122 25 confirm 62 13 99 12 confirmed 62 1 9 confirming 138 5 7 conflict 116 19 117 7 11 20 conflicts 27 3 confusing 82 10 111 1 Congress 116 3 160 7 11 Congressional 18 5 connection 10 3 182 5 205 21 Consequently 125 25 145 7 consider 25 16 55 20 121 18 161 21 consideration 46 14 63 8 considered 39 6 41 13 43 5 47 1 121 20 122 10 135 8 149 11 150 9 153 13 19 160 20 161 20 considering 18 19 20 2 22 52 14 consistent 12 1 141 1 177 25 178 15 180 18 constitute 121 19 consult 66 21 158 14 22 consultants 128 11 128 21 22 consulted 52 18 146 3 158 18 210 11 contact 169 23 170 17 18 contained 64 16 65 22 120 4 containing 166 22 contains 119 11 contemplated 19 5 contemporaneous 73 7 74 13 contend 148 20 content 72 23 context 52 6 continuation 136 5 continue 135 22 193 11 207 13 continued 3 1 4 1 5 1 7 1 130 3 133 21 23 135 11 135 18 continues 109 24 continuing 11 18 41 7 107 20 134 3 contours 113 24 contract 68 20 contractor 35 8 116 20 117 1 12 117 20 contrary 154 21 155 7 17 24 156 12 controlled 24 25 192 15 Convention 17 10 conversation 75 8 164 2 conversion 43 23 conveyed 172 20 convince 130 24 convinced 28 16 convincing 58 19 58 21 cooperate 62 21 cooperating 62 20 copied 32 12 copy 23 25 32 10 68 10 core 66 6 10 correct 15 8 17 7 31 21 22 33 7 13 33 14 34 25 38 16 40 13 14 41 1 44 3 48 4 55 2 7 55 11 58 23 62 11 62 12 64 6 23 66 4 9 17 67 22 70 9 21 21 25 76 12 80 1 81 19 82 24 85 25 86 10 86 13 18 88 13 97 19 101 2 107 22 108 20 110 11 115 18 19 120 9 124 15 16 124 22 25 125 6 127 10 129 8 136 16 138 9 139 23 24 142 13 144 3 150 24 151 21 25 152 4 152 14 154 8 12 154 16 159 8 Page 5 161 16 167 15 171 9 9 175 18 178 20 21 24 182 5 17 183 4 5 186 3 12 188 1 18 189 3 5 190 5 8 190 16 191 6 16 192 10 14 16 17 192 22 193 2 6 7 193 14 17 196 1 196 16 20 198 20 198 20 201 11 13 201 25 202 4 16 202 19 20 203 22 207 1 21 25 209 21 correctly 42 3 50 11 199 11 counsel 2 1 5 3 7 8 22 13 4 17 25 18 7 29 1 31 10 31 16 19 33 2 36 18 40 1 41 13 42 8 15 120 10 11 120 12 19 147 3 167 14 168 10 12 170 11 12 171 14 172 18 173 23 174 18 176 12 178 8 179 11 183 7 184 16 186 15 206 19 210 1 211 13 17 Counsel's 77 13 Counter 18 23 19 10 30 25 188 22 24 counting 166 6 181 18 couple 74 20 178 6 184 20 195 1 206 16 course 46 23 49 24 95 13 102 3 154 7 196 6 203 2 208 13 ACLU-RDI p 216 courses 75 2 court 1 1 8 9 20 11 2 13 24 32 13 39 14 168 17 211 1 courtesy 14 11 courts 122 24 124 2 9 cover 10 12 48 5 7 49 14 53 6 100 14 covered 16 2 49 22 crafting 153 13 209 20 210 5 cramped 93 2 create 147 23 148 9 created 106 20 201 18 202 3 creation 41 8 credit 186 18 cried 133 7 134 18 criminal 17 2 6 53 13 54 16 25 55 4 87 21 criticism 146 9 crosses 162 1 CRR 1 23 cry 133 21 crystal 189 1 CTC 19 21 25 22 14 27 20 22 28 15 37 6 8 38 22 47 18 48 1 50 23 52 12 25 57 20 60 21 22 61 2 62 19 71 14 71 14 80 22 89 10 135 7 10 17 140 19 144 1 146 14 179 17 188 15 17 19 20 190 3 191 4 194 3 194 4 199 24 207 11 12 208 4 7 culminate 58 18 curious 101 7 current 127 5 129 12 16 162 21 custody 92 24 cut 180 12 194 10 60 11 18 24 79 16 79 24 186 10 13 186 23 191 18 decision-making D 190 1 207 3 23 D 2 13 84 12 declaration 6 14 15 125 11 134 25 6 17 15 19 22 25 Dan 77 4 5 16 2 5 8 11 14 17 dangerous 164 24 31 23 32 11 23 165 14 21 33 22 34 1 3 10 dark 122 25 124 3 38 4 10 39 11 19 darkness 161 4 15 42 19 43 20 24 161 19 44 10 61 15 63 19 data 150 21 151 16 72 21 22 81 2 151 19 86 9 87 1 99 16 date 127 9 14 99 18 22 24 100 4 130 16 181 4 100 9 12 15 22 208 20 101 8 11 13 dated 131 25 104 14 108 16 David 4 3 9 15 166 20 167 4 9 14 david unruh@ho 168 20 169 18 21 4 10 172 14 177 20 day 120 2 129 10 180 15 184 8 130 13 132 3 195 5 6 199 5 134 11 193 5 209 20 22 210 6 days 55 15 84 6 declare 101 17 128 8 130 18 declination 51 24 131 15 132 4 52 4 8 53 4 10 17 134 3 6 147 10 14 54 9 24 55 5 148 18 172 20 208 17 day-to-day 188 22 deem 207 13 deal 17 16 29 4 deemed 57 20 dealing 192 19 20 104 2 deals 170 17 defendant 4 2 9 24 dealt 18 10 67 18 defendants 1 9 3 2 172 19 9 18 20 22 15 19 death 103 19 196 4 15 25 16 3 17 196 19 99 15 20 23 100 4 decades 153 1 1 11 100 5 101 1 17 194 19 209 19 decide 100 11 defending 14 5 191 8 12 Defense 120 11 25 decided 28 23 define 85 15 100 21 188 12 definition 17 6 193 4 definitional 122 14 decision 50 14 60 2 definitive 31 9 49 18 50 16 degradation 121 19 150 8 degrading 122 11 122 15 18 123 2 124 1 4 degree 151 13 deliberation 46 23 denied 109 3 deny 75 5 Department 4 13 4 17 10 1 29 1 30 13 35 14 53 8 55 1 87 22 120 11 120 25 182 19 21 185 10 21 209 2 deposed 13 8 16 8 deposition 1 12 6 13 7 2 8 1 6 14 10 12 23 11 19 13 7 9 15 7 13 34 8 103 9 168 17 197 5 206 13 210 17 20 211 6 8 211 12 15 depositions 12 9 deprivation 70 19 71 6 7 73 12 19 74 7 17 75 2 11 77 17 78 2 11 13 93 1 104 3 4 105 11 149 1 189 10 13 deprive 74 23 depriving 73 21 describe 25 2 43 22 64 17 69 11 89 8 91 25 112 12 122 23 180 9 198 11 described 24 20 30 10 40 19 69 22 69 25 70 23 78 24 83 7 105 17 134 7 141 23 149 11 160 17 Page 6 describes 86 15 87 6 89 20 22 24 describing 142 16 description 90 4 98 21 designed 116 21 117 1 desperate 130 23 131 10 destroyed 178 11 detailed 87 9 details 109 5 130 10 144 23 160 10 detained 62 16 85 22 detainee 73 21 74 5 85 3 88 19 89 11 90 5 92 6 7 9 93 6 94 6 23 95 9 11 98 22 103 25 105 20 108 18 111 3 112 19 113 19 124 14 21 124 23 125 22 24 129 3 136 5 141 4 156 16 20 182 8 9 189 13 190 24 193 1 196 8 200 9 detainees 63 21 65 8 15 72 7 78 6 85 8 17 21 86 16 91 11 15 16 92 1 93 14 94 12 96 11 97 17 21 99 17 106 1 109 22 110 14 118 24 119 15 18 120 5 7 120 25 140 20 142 21 144 13 21 145 1 147 9 13 148 17 149 2 20 156 13 179 1 2 6 179 8 9 13 14 21 179 24 180 2 182 11 12 183 4 ACLU-RDI p 217 183 10 10 203 4 7 203 21 24 205 20 206 25 detainee's 135 5 136 25 detention 11 13 196 25 determination 41 14 206 3 determinations 148 13 determine 28 12 30 22 157 8 206 1 determined 31 9 62 20 189 19 192 9 205 24 determining 170 4 develop 129 17 developed 65 11 devices 176 13 devising 74 22 75 10 20 diaper 78 7 122 1 122 19 diapers 147 9 14 148 18 died 195 21 196 2 Dietary 149 9 differed 26 16 difference 22 3 123 8 20 25 141 19 differences 63 3 different 23 13 34 8 36 1 52 14 54 1 1 57 3 12 59 24 65 18 67 19 70 15 85 8 94 14 94 15 96 11 103 25 111 2 115 2 4 141 22 147 24 148 10 14 differently 55 13 difficult 90 8 difficulty 55 18 23 165 6 digits 173 4 dignity 121 21 150 9 direct 82 9 87 5 97 12 103 12 132 13 173 16 174 1 192 2 203 24 directed 192 21 193 11 194 5 direction 193 12 207 8 directly 37 4 7 39 2 68 17 69 3 Director 26 1 158 25 207 9 disagree 117 9 15 148 5 149 13 155 22 23 disagreements 136 4 disclosed 11 9 disclosure 10 19 12 4 discovery 96 6 175 14 discuss 119 17 discussed 80 4 6 6 101 24 150 18 151 6 discussing 26 3 43 19 101 23 discussion 73 18 74 4 79 17 80 11 120 12 208 23 209 1 discussions 146 13 147 16 207 10 disk 204 14 disorder 18 16 41 9 41 16 42 7 display 130 21 23 Disposition 6 23 88 24 dispute 75 6 99 12 distinct 101 22 distressed 133 24 distribute 48 10 District 1 1 1 8 9 8 10 211 4 24 Division 4 14 17 5 7 53 13 87 21 dladin@aclu org 2 11 doctor 191 9 13 200 6 205 19 doctors 27 19 74 21 174 21 document 22 19 33 15 41 18 45 10 45 14 20 64 16 17 81 10 15 25 82 7 82 11 83 10 88 25 92 17 95 15 16 25 96 5 8 13 19 97 10 14 98 17 103 13 109 25 110 2 4 115 18 119 2 126 12 129 21 138 23 139 4 17 22 142 16 167 1 173 12 175 9 17 176 17 21 24 180 3 181 1 5 184 13 186 11 199 3 200 18 201 1 3 12 15 18 201 21 202 2 12 documented 160 4 documents 74 13 98 3 176 14 197 16 209 23 DOD 171 25 172 18 doing 44 12 67 3 102 14 163 24 164 13 193 10 DOJ's 37 9 Donald 162 22 dosing 149 10 double 42 9 128 7 doubt 98 10 106 5 147 17 dousing 90 2 93 3 Dr 21 4 6 6 25 24 75 13 13 79 10 13 80 20 110 25 154 15 16 175 11 175 12 23 23 176 5 180 13 186 22 187 11 188 2 5 18 189 2 189 4 190 5 7 191 6 199 22 22 200 4 4 204 3 4 205 3 6 207 22 22 210 4 4 drafted 44 9 dropped 66 16 Dror 2 4 9 3 12 24 Drs 38 1 13 17 39 2 41 1 45 1 5 66 18 68 22 69 7 21 71 10 80 3 6 128 23 167 22 169 21 170 3 18 170 21 172 22 177 7 193 25 199 13 drugs 14 22 duly 11 5 duplication 65 6 duration 71 9 D C 1 19 3 6 4 8 19 5 8 8 16 D63 84 13 15 112 8 D93 125 19 20 E E 1 7 3 9 earlier 46 19 68 20 71 3 101 24 109 21 111 9 15 114 5 128 1 141 12 142 20 150 19 151 6 160 11 200 8 Page 7 202 25 203 17 209 18 early 18 21 21 22 70 15 easiest 48 10 easily 169 14 Eastern 1 1 8 10 easy 125 12 effect 140 20 effective 52 1 24 effectively 133 25 effectiveness 116 23 117 3 effects 152 12 153 2 18 171 15 171 20 172 10 177 11 efficacious 145 12 effort 174 7 10 207 8 16 eight 21 10 EIT 64 18 21 65 5 66 3 67 19 69 1 69 10 73 19 23 75 2 78 11 80 4 85 5 88 12 14 16 89 21 90 5 91 23 92 1 7 9 93 15 95 18 96 21 97 3 97 21 25 98 5 11 99 4 8 101 9 21 101 22 25 102 5 102 11 17 109 20 112 13 113 24 114 3 159 7 196 15 197 10 either 38 22 49 18 49 24 25 87 20 98 14 102 17 112 8 145 12 154 15 175 11 176 4 181 11 EITs 19 15 33 3 62 2 10 75 20 84 25 85 24 86 2 86 4 24 87 4 16 ACLU-RDI p 218 87 24 88 13 89 9 89 11 16 90 5 92 6 8 25 93 7 14 94 6 7 12 95 9 10 96 7 24 97 7 98 23 99 2 3 3 110 20 112 17 124 13 20 24 126 1 135 10 22 136 5 9 137 14 142 22 146 4 159 13 20 24 171 16 21 172 11 177 12 24 178 14 178 14 202 12 203 18 23 EIT's 128 9 EKD 19 1 eliminated 80 18 183 15 Elmer 8 8 embodied 194 9 embodiments 186 2 emerged 130 10 employ 58 17 108 13 156 24 employance 137 14 employed 26 11 190 22 211 14 17 employee 211 17 employing 108 6 156 16 employment 84 25 86 2 encountered 106 15 ended 128 9 9 10 endorsed 165 15 endured 159 19 engage 207 16 engaged 120 12 enhanced 18 19 22 25 64 21 65 13 66 6 12 80 21 85 17 86 17 87 13 90 1 91 9 21 104 9 18 105 9 19 107 21 108 3 6 13 108 18 25 109 8 109 17 23 110 17 110 22 111 10 13 113 1 14 17 114 1 114 12 13 15 22 115 1 3 5 116 4 152 13 177 4 183 24 184 22 185 11 190 10 14 190 18 21 191 9 191 25 192 24 193 10 203 7 206 24 ensure 31 25 33 2 116 19 117 19 149 19 entails 115 8 entire 18 6 entirely 150 23 entitled 35 4 196 22 entity 171 25 episode 119 21 120 20 errant 197 8 198 11 19 escalating 58 13 escalation 58 16 17 escapes 200 3 especially 130 10 ESQUIRE 2 4 5 6 2 13 14 3 3 9 10 3 20 4 3 4 16 5 4 5 5 essence 28 15 essential 207 13 established 29 14 estate 195 23 estimate 181 9 et 1 4 198 19 evaluated 61 7 108 2 2 109 11 113 25 117 21 158 23 evaluating 116 23 117 3 158 15 evaluation 36 19 47 11 12 140 22 evaluations 47 6 eventually 55 8 66 2 everybody 184 2 evidence 154 21 155 7 17 24 156 12 163 24 168 22 197 20 204 8 evidenced 135 5 136 25 evoked 73 23 74 7 evolved 69 16 70 23 exacerbated 91 10 exact 79 22 exactly 38 2 149 19 exaggerated 146 7 examination 6 1 4 11 4 12 20 166 12 171 13 206 19 209 16 examine 44 12 examined 11 5 example 17 5 38 15 126 7 examples 82 15 exceed 189 10 exception 168 22 exceptions 83 6 excerpt 6 18 51 16 68 6 127 23 157 20 excerpts 127 12 128 1 exclusively 180 2 excuse 17 19 58 17 executed 116 21 117 2 166 21 167 5 168 20 exhibit 6 10 11 14 6 15 17 17 18 19 6 21 23 24 25 7 3 7 5 7 9 10 11 12 10 25 11 7 10 22 20 22 32 11 14 32 17 18 33 16 19 34 1 3 39 11 16 43 19 44 13 45 11 51 5 9 17 58 3 63 19 24 64 1 65 22 68 2 72 20 73 2 4 76 6 7 22 79 4 81 1 2 21 24 83 16 19 22 86 8 87 1 6 88 7 10 90 19 92 12 15 98 18 103 15 104 13 107 9 11 110 5 6 111 22 23 114 9 118 11 121 5 6 125 7 126 15 127 12 129 23 131 21 22 138 18 20 139 4 152 8 160 23 24 166 18 23 169 10 173 1 5 7 176 19 177 20 180 5 14 180 18 21 183 8 183 18 184 4 7 186 2 5 187 1 194 11 25 199 1 200 14 202 5 6 204 12 22 exhibits 6 9 13 16 7 1 2 14 15 24 39 19 166 22 167 7 8 168 21 169 11 12 13 13 209 23 existed 154 11 159 7 167 18 existence 117 7 existing 186 21 expanded 183 3 9 expected 41 6 Page 8 193 12 experience 17 24 22 6 27 23 28 4 56 19 60 17 93 13 106 9 116 2 158 5 experienced 22 16 expertise 56 20 experts 22 9 10 75 17 156 23 157 3 9 expires 211 25 explain 48 17 explore 62 21 expose 157 6 exposing 161 13 express 150 2 expressed 57 17 72 6 15 73 11 23 74 10 expressing 150 17 extend 14 11 extent 30 21 86 22 86 23 120 21 174 19 177 9 193 8 extract 27 7 extracted 27 14 extraordinary 53 23 25 54 6 extra-national 20 15 Eye 1 18 3 5 8 15 eyes 131 9 e-mail 72 22 78 24 196 3 7 factual 141 17 148 13 171 7 196 11 failed 68 12 fair 14 17 18 50 22 117 22 22 170 10 175 20 191 18 21 198 14 fairly 53 22 78 14 fairness 192 23 193 19 22 faithfully 144 5 false 27 7 12 14 familiar 49 5 89 9 172 4 184 12 15 far 25 13 31 13 35 23 39 1 4 47 20 60 10 16 75 18 142 19 143 24 152 3 204 6 fashion 87 25 favor 51 1 fear 28 20 155 5 156 12 feasible 53 11 54 20 feature 80 24 feedback 35 24 36 5 5 7 41 14 58 8 59 1 field 135 4 136 3 142 8 8 14 19 143 1 25 179 12 F 193 9 F 3 3 figure 157 13 facet 194 5 final 135 5 136 25 facial 104 4 105 14 209 11 fact 26 2 10 28 13 finalized 99 24 29 5 15 30 17 finally 78 22 46 25 86 4 101 25 192 18 196 21 148 8 152 6 208 9 factors 40 12 13 financially 211 18 147 22 148 9 find 31 4 84 16 facts 40 4 89 19 125 12 152 21 ACLU-RDI p 219 154 20 155 7 17 155 24 156 11 157 6 16 163 1 164 15 180 10 finding 118 20 finish 59 19 164 6 164 15 finished 14 7 9 163 11 firm 8 17 79 15 24 149 17 first 7 15 11 5 19 1 19 20 21 3 22 22 24 21 25 11 33 19 36 10 64 1 73 4 81 21 83 13 19 89 5 92 15 105 7 107 11 108 7 119 4 127 8 132 5 143 8 151 1 155 14 21 166 16 173 18 182 13 184 20 199 17 21 five 68 20 130 18 174 5 fix 181 4 floor 2 8 154 1 flow 37 1 3 85 10 flowed 37 3 8 focus 179 18 folks 168 1 follow 91 22 137 8 followed 186 5 193 13 following 40 12 91 17 92 25 96 24 97 7 99 2 104 1 203 9 follows 11 6 foolish 165 21 23 foot 91 15 Footnote 145 5 forces 20 13 foregoing 211 6 8 Forgive 199 4 forgone 198 7 forgot 51 6 form 29 8 53 24 54 21 57 7 62 5 75 11 180 12 201 11 formal 14 1 51 23 52 4 53 4 16 former 157 17 forms 59 14 194 16 203 4 forth 25 14 15 33 11 35 24 36 3 38 21 52 13 108 12 169 2 183 8 found 122 25 124 2 148 13 153 1 11 FOUNDATION 2 7 four 173 4 197 15 197 22 202 7 fourth 162 7 Frank 8 18 Franklin 5 15 frankly 154 17 185 5 free 150 2 freezing 160 18 19 161 3 13 frequency 145 10 Frey 2 13 9 5 5 13 1 118 13 Frontline 67 5 87 18 full 35 4 105 7 144 16 155 3 function 55 6 further 31 20 36 24 53 5 129 4 168 19 191 17 200 10 11 209 9 211 16 futile 129 5 future 13 15 G Gateway 2 16 gauge 141 4 general 5 7 6 24 17 25 18 4 7 53 12 77 13 88 25 103 18 120 9 10 120 19 152 25 153 9 172 18 178 8 186 15 189 12 generally 52 16 17 83 5 15 119 20 177 15 General's 125 2 generate 94 8 generated 135 21 genesis 69 13 22 Geneva 17 9 George 21 18 German 27 2 gestures 14 21 getting 55 18 23 56 12 80 25 Gettysburg 204 16 Ghraib 73 25 74 7 Gibbons 2 15 give 32 10 49 12 82 17 98 24 116 8 125 11 126 20 179 12 181 9 186 18 given 10 15 52 22 133 9 136 5 138 17 210 1 211 13 giving 120 21 glad 14 15 go 13 6 21 8 23 12 24 3 11 26 9 37 10 10 11 39 12 45 15 16 46 8 54 3 58 2 60 12 60 24 61 23 79 1 79 8 84 7 15 90 25 97 9 101 3 112 4 8 115 9 118 3 123 3 124 6 Page 9 128 7 132 20 134 23 138 10 13 138 14 16 149 24 150 11 164 10 16 165 9 169 6 12 170 25 171 10 174 5 181 20 183 17 17 186 25 192 3 194 25 200 22 206 5 209 4 14 goes 13 15 going 13 6 20 22 18 32 10 21 39 22 43 12 45 9 48 6 49 25 50 4 51 20 57 6 58 5 60 19 80 2 12 82 20 92 18 93 8 94 13 99 19 100 16 103 20 107 13 118 6 119 12 121 9 122 3 125 2 125 9 126 18 139 1 149 23 150 25 163 6 24 165 3 166 17 169 9 172 25 175 24 178 13 183 24 191 20 207 24 good 12 22 23 95 1 102 24 147 19 158 19 166 14 201 7 Goodin 1 23 8 20 211 5 22 Goss 159 1 government 5 2 10 2 4 8 21 11 17 11 20 12 2 5 10 12 14 118 24 119 16 153 13 155 7 173 3 174 20 22 175 1 175 12 176 14 ACLU-RDI p 220 208 18 19 grasp 93 2 104 5 grateful 116 12 great 12 19 28 20 29 4 Green 44 1 2 grilled 133 13 ground 135 25 142 3 guarantee 93 19 164 6 guards 205 24 206 1 2 guess 19 9 113 20 144 15 195 25 guidance 6 11 7 9 10 24 11 11 23 49 18 52 21 63 20 81 1 4 18 83 6 15 86 9 12 101 21 102 1 2 10 104 15 111 10 13 16 112 14 138 16 141 2 24 144 5 210 9 guide 10 22 guidelines 64 5 Gul 99 17 101 8 103 19 108 17 23 113 10 195 16 guy 90 15 guys 155 8 happened 119 22 160 14 202 15 203 12 happening 43 2 hard 149 14 163 1 181 6 195 10 harm 32 2 41 7 harsh 25 3 17 harshest 25 12 Hayden 207 9 Haynes 172 19 Hazim 97 17 head 14 20 71 14 78 8 157 25 198 4 208 7 headquarters 70 6 85 3 9 91 14 16 91 20 92 5 97 18 97 23 109 2 6 112 19 125 24 25 135 11 22 136 4 187 6 15 19 24 188 16 17 189 22 189 23 24 25 190 22 191 10 11 191 12 20 192 9 192 13 15 21 193 4 11 12 health 189 12 hear 25 20 102 16 144 12 20 heard 28 8 29 22 29 24 126 3 H 144 22 24 159 10 halt 15 3 176 11 hand 12 12 37 17 hearing 28 7 126 5 126 11 204 10 handcuffed 78 8 Heather 5 4 10 5 handed 128 1 heavily 140 23 hands 78 8 149 3 held 10 16 63 23 173 14 118 24 119 15 17 Hank 9 21 119 19 124 10 Hanner 4 4 9 13 13 150 18 48 18 22 180 14 hell 164 13 184 7 195 5 help 174 7 10 200 22 helplessness 128 12 128 22 129 1 198 23 199 9 200 2 HENRY 3 3 hereto 211 18 hesitation 57 17 high 19 1 58 14 65 14 85 16 21 107 24 108 17 179 1 2 21 24 180 2 182 9 12 183 3 10 193 1 196 8 206 25 highly 72 3 126 23 Hina 2 5 9 9 hindsight 152 17 153 25 154 6 hinges 58 20 hired 68 19 history 31 3 HOGAN 3 21 4 5 hold 57 1 116 9 holding 28 16 125 24 129 7 11 130 19 25 203 6 holdup 56 16 home 153 8 homeland 28 22 157 7 honestly 96 1 98 14 106 7 110 25 111 4 115 5 7 120 18 172 16 honorable 147 20 hoping 86 25 138 2 hour 168 3 9 hours 178 9 189 10 House 120 1 12 199 19 20 23 housed 85 18 HQS 174 10 hschuelke@blan 3 8 humane 120 6 humanely 118 25 119 16 120 5 humiliating 122 1 122 8 13 22 humiliation 121 19 150 8 HVD 195 17 HVDs 62 2 10 HVT 107 21 23 108 3 109 8 11 11 109 12 114 12 115 1 I IC 34 21 24 35 25 36 6 58 8 12 idea 54 11 13 78 19 78 20 80 2 88 23 142 4 155 25 201 5 20 202 1 209 7 8 identical 20 23 32 1 62 25 63 2 171 2 identification 11 8 32 19 39 17 51 10 51 18 76 8 88 8 103 16 121 7 126 16 129 24 131 23 138 21 152 9 160 25 166 24 173 8 identified 11 22 36 6 44 2 45 11 72 21 81 17 83 7 110 17 111 9 161 2 190 15 202 8 identifier 176 2 6 identify 166 19 173 3 17 201 12 identifying 107 5 identities 133 14 identity 175 8 IG 83 25 87 21 88 11 105 17 106 5 9 15 20 107 2 110 7 Page 10 111 20 117 24 126 10 134 23 136 15 137 22 140 4 141 11 143 5 6 145 2 18 148 12 ignorance 131 6 133 22 II 194 15 III 3 3 illegal 185 12 image 73 22 24 images 73 24 74 7 immediate 24 21 immediately 19 20 28 25 53 13 immoral 198 5 immunity 208 14 impact 26 12 124 9 158 9 impair 14 23 implement 144 4 implementation 73 22 implementing 75 1 imply 158 17 important 14 11 26 6 41 13 57 20 80 23 157 16 impossible 200 20 impression 72 17 117 4 improved 90 1 161 24 inability 130 24 inaccurate 93 22 113 6 8 115 22 197 9 198 12 18 201 23 incentive 154 20 155 3 6 17 156 1 156 4 inception 185 7 include 100 12 22 107 20 included 7 24 70 4 ACLU-RDI p 221 including 6 16 108 3 115 2 197 22 inclusion 108 25 inconsistent 121 15 142 15 17 incorporate 190 19 incorporating 38 15 increased 131 9 independent 35 7 independently 27 11 INDEX 6 1 9 7 1 indicate 45 21 85 13 95 10 16 96 20 97 2 20 98 8 134 10 indicated 46 18 57 24 74 21 79 19 100 13 indicates 96 23 indication 45 5 24 107 18 individual 96 20 97 3 140 24 202 8 202 12 individuals 96 7 influential 158 7 10 information 10 17 10 21 11 13 16 22 12 6 28 17 31 21 33 12 36 17 24 37 8 39 6 43 4 47 1 77 17 78 1 124 17 127 5 129 12 130 11 20 131 1 7 132 9 22 133 1 5 23 134 15 134 19 135 4 12 135 19 136 24 139 25 140 20 22 141 4 142 15 156 14 157 14 174 20 175 13 177 13 178 5 198 11 201 9 20 informed 19 25 147 12 160 8 initial 20 4 31 2 146 3 initially 182 13 initiated 47 4 injuries 91 10 inquire 159 11 inquiry 196 18 insects 63 14 inserted 84 23 Inspector 6 24 18 4 88 25 103 18 125 2 instances 175 7 10 198 9 17 203 5 23 instigation 21 23 instruct 12 2 165 3 instructed 132 25 134 14 instruction 11 18 instructions 13 7 64 8 instructs 11 20 insulation 208 18 insult 93 1 insulting 72 19 intake 189 11 Intelligence 5 6 10 14 11 11 82 2 196 24 Intelligence's 196 23 intense 207 17 intensity 145 10 interact 77 7 12 interactions 46 22 interest 116 19 117 7 11 20 interested 16 3 26 2 211 19 interests 10 10 internal 30 22 internally 87 20 interrogation 6 20 7 3 5 7 11 14 18 20 19 4 21 23 22 9 25 27 14 28 18 29 23 35 9 40 3 5 18 25 44 19 45 22 52 14 52 22 53 6 56 17 57 11 58 14 65 13 66 7 8 12 80 21 83 4 14 85 2 7 18 86 17 87 14 89 24 91 18 21 22 104 2 104 9 14 105 9 19 106 1 21 108 18 108 25 109 9 17 109 23 110 13 16 110 18 22 111 10 111 13 17 112 18 113 1 10 12 14 18 114 6 14 22 115 3 115 5 116 4 126 7 126 24 130 14 131 14 17 132 4 132 10 23 133 13 135 8 25 143 9 147 23 148 10 152 13 153 14 161 25 174 12 177 4 178 9 183 25 184 23 185 11 187 3 8 21 191 25 192 11 24 193 10 196 25 203 7 206 24 interrogations 63 20 64 5 10 67 7 107 20 143 17 20 191 10 interrogator 109 12 interrogators 67 12 67 16 130 25 131 5 142 8 9 20 143 1 145 11 190 23 interview 76 17 77 4 interviewed 76 14 84 3 6 152 11 197 23 198 1 introduced 13 16 investigation 94 8 94 23 95 9 13 96 3 197 15 investigations 88 22 102 17 investigators 197 24 involved 35 8 37 7 37 15 38 1 42 20 47 21 48 1 52 3 52 13 67 23 120 20 149 2 179 20 185 6 190 1 197 21 involves 91 21 involving 91 16 97 16 isolated 83 6 isolation 29 22 24 30 2 104 3 111 5 160 17 19 161 4 161 14 19 189 9 issuance 55 15 issue 11 17 79 14 79 17 80 14 119 8 119 9 25 120 8 133 14 153 12 155 25 156 3 166 1 Item 192 18 iterative 36 3 17 21 36 23 J J 1 23 4 3 6 17 39 11 12 20 43 19 44 13 211 5 22 James 1 7 3 10 4 2 5 13 8 8 9 23 19 7 21 18 January 15 8 81 5 Page 11 83 4 14 86 11 166 21 167 5 184 6 185 25 186 15 Japanese 27 2 Jersey 2 17 Jessen 1 8 8 8 21 6 21 22 26 25 27 6 27 19 22 34 25 38 1 13 18 39 2 41 1 42 5 13 19 42 22 43 5 45 2 5 45 23 46 13 47 7 47 17 21 55 9 61 8 66 19 67 6 68 23 69 7 21 71 11 74 21 25 75 10 13 80 3 7 102 12 103 24 104 3 110 25 111 2 128 23 151 23 154 15 167 22 169 22 170 4 18 21 172 22 174 22 175 12 23 177 2 7 179 19 20 188 5 189 4 190 7 191 6 194 1 199 13 22 200 4 204 4 207 22 Jessen's 210 4 jet 78 14 Jim 9 19 19 14 166 15 172 19 180 9 job 106 19 107 1 137 21 John 1 8 12 6 3 8 1 8 6 8 9 1 11 3 55 16 56 22 57 23 103 9 121 5 12 150 5 17 166 20 206 13 210 17 Joint 172 1 Joseph 5 3 10 5 ACLU-RDI p 222 josephs3@ucia gov 5 10 Jose 19 7 9 14 19 21 18 JPRA 171 19 24 172 9 17 23 177 9 judge 22 6 106 12 141 13 16 209 14 judged 140 19 judgment 136 20 July 181 12 June 168 19 juries 91 15 justice 4 13 17 10 1 29 1 35 14 53 8 55 1 87 22 149 15 165 25 182 19 20 185 9 21 209 2 Justice's 30 13 justify 56 6 50 5 57 7 60 16 95 4 8 137 5 66 10 68 1 2 Ladin 2 4 6 5 7 9 3 71 10 75 9 12 9 3 12 21 24 79 19 80 9 88 23 15 11 17 22 23 88 25 94 1 95 25 22 24 23 7 24 4 97 6 99 25 102 19 24 14 25 23 26 14 104 20 24 107 23 29 16 19 21 32 6 109 14 15 115 7 32 8 13 20 33 8 9 122 15 20 123 4 5 33 23 34 2 6 12 123 6 9 16 134 2 35 6 19 36 15 136 17 140 24 37 19 38 7 8 143 3 148 22 23 39 14 21 41 4 20 149 1 19 155 15 42 1 43 8 17 44 6 156 14 159 17 44 22 45 13 19 160 3 161 23 24 46 5 11 24 48 2 8 163 5 23 167 18 48 15 20 23 49 2 170 7 9 175 3 3 50 7 8 51 4 6 13 176 12 177 12 16 51 15 19 54 7 177 16 179 5 23 57 8 10 58 1 181 6 193 20 59 21 60 8 9 194 11 14 18 22 61 13 22 25 62 6 K 195 25 201 8 14 62 8 64 2 65 16 keep 25 19 28 14 201 17 202 15 18 71 22 23 72 25 44 4 77 22 79 2 3 204 6 205 23 73 6 15 17 76 5 88 3 90 12 93 13 207 12 209 14 76 10 20 25 77 2 114 20 133 15 210 10 77 10 11 78 16 21 keeping 124 2 knowing 60 3 79 9 81 22 82 4 6 149 2 160 7 146 10 82 18 19 24 83 1 kept 66 18 20 147 9 knowledge 18 9 83 20 86 21 88 4 147 13 148 18 20 7 38 12 18 22 88 9 89 14 90 16 203 21 42 4 11 16 46 21 91 2 5 92 4 16 21 Khalid 62 16 63 8 108 24 109 18 92 23 93 12 94 4 kind 18 22 71 9 169 21 170 20 94 16 19 95 3 7 176 2 182 11 172 9 24 190 6 95 21 96 17 97 1 200 21 205 18 210 3 97 8 98 1 9 16 207 12 knowledgeable 99 14 23 100 2 18 knew 29 12 123 21 196 2 100 23 101 5 125 25 158 9 known 141 3 147 8 103 1 11 14 17 177 6 204 8 148 17 20 168 5 105 10 24 106 14 know 15 2 18 18 knows 130 4 107 12 111 21 21 21 25 22 10 Korean 27 2 112 1 5 7 114 24 23 15 24 23 28 19 KSM 62 23 115 12 13 116 1 28 20 30 1 3 4 5 8 116 10 118 16 18 L 31 12 32 16 33 21 120 14 121 8 35 3 7 39 2 4 41 2 label 173 4 122 9 16 123 7 16 44 20 23 47 20 lack 49 13 87 9 123 19 24 124 11 125 16 126 13 17 127 2 3 15 19 22 128 2 3 17 129 22 129 25 131 20 24 135 15 16 137 19 137 25 138 4 15 138 18 22 139 5 9 139 16 19 21 141 15 143 2 144 8 11 19 150 4 150 15 152 6 10 152 20 153 6 158 19 21 159 16 160 22 161 1 162 3 21 163 1 5 163 8 12 13 18 164 1 5 14 17 165 4 8 15 22 166 2 174 24 175 24 209 11 15 209 17 210 13 lag 78 14 laid 203 9 language 171 3 large 92 17 larger 111 20 lasted 134 9 late 18 22 71 2 8 law 16 23 17 2 17 54 17 25 55 4 lawfully 51 2 Lawrence 2 14 9 7 lawsuit 167 25 168 7 lawyer 154 7 181 25 185 4 5 lawyers 30 25 37 6 71 14 167 21 170 8 179 16 17 201 8 209 20 210 4 lay 162 4 layman 129 2 layman's 200 8 lays 183 23 lead 145 19 207 7 Page 12 leadership 185 5 leading 53 9 learn 30 6 77 21 203 4 learned 27 16 78 5 95 5 128 12 22 129 1 172 15 196 8 17 198 23 199 8 200 1 learning 196 6 leave 164 10 Leaving 141 19 led 145 22 left 154 22 176 13 181 19 204 14 legal 7 9 8 19 21 22 7 26 6 13 28 6 28 9 13 24 25 31 2 4 10 12 12 31 16 19 33 1 36 18 40 1 11 41 13 42 7 15 48 5 49 13 18 52 12 25 53 6 54 19 59 23 60 25 64 10 138 16 144 5 147 3 162 1 170 11 12 178 18 184 22 185 20 22 legality 28 2 30 22 31 14 33 12 38 14 41 14 42 20 46 15 47 2 5 60 14 169 23 170 5 182 15 22 185 10 legally 56 5 161 15 legislative 31 3 legitimate 54 21 letter 6 25 121 4 141 9 let's 39 10 12 43 8 51 3 4 15 52 9 67 25 83 12 87 15 88 4 90 11 17 103 1 104 19 111 19 115 9 ACLU-RDI p 223 118 3 121 4 126 6 126 13 128 14 18 129 22 136 21 21 137 7 138 16 18 144 8 146 23 152 7 155 1 160 22 164 3 16 170 25 171 10 173 17 177 8 186 25 198 21 206 5 level 78 8 121 20 129 16 133 24 150 8 Levin 77 4 5 12 LIBERTIES 2 7 Libyan 91 14 license 16 23 lie 93 5 11 life 66 8 lifetime 66 13 light 40 4 likelihood 42 6 14 Lincoln's 204 16 line 28 10 83 5 15 162 2 lines 21 11 28 6 74 4 174 5 liquid 149 20 list 11 12 15 96 10 98 22 151 10 listed 65 17 104 12 105 12 listen 175 6 lists 23 11 40 13 64 20 20 104 17 literature 31 4 litigation 5 7 209 24 210 2 little 90 8 154 20 155 2 6 16 24 25 181 20 live 162 14 LLC 8 17 LLP 1 17 3 4 11 8 15 llustberg@gibbo 2 20 lobbying 170 22 locate 149 14 Logan 3 12 long 37 23 76 6 106 8 124 13 136 18 161 3 14 161 18 189 11 194 11 205 24 longer 25 1 71 4 141 5 long-term 152 12 171 20 172 9 177 10 look 17 5 35 17 39 10 40 15 41 17 51 3 58 12 68 5 7 72 20 73 10 74 13 74 19 76 18 77 3 77 15 78 23 87 15 99 5 110 1 8 112 9 24 114 11 117 24 121 4 129 20 130 16 22 132 7 136 21 145 3 146 23 161 7 169 15 189 6 192 11 18 199 18 looked 17 13 38 16 81 1 104 20 106 8 110 1 129 9 132 5 182 13 looking 24 7 44 17 97 10 14 101 6 111 5 114 8 119 2 136 14 141 2 176 16 184 5 199 6 201 10 looks 23 21 49 5 135 10 171 2 Lori 1 23 8 20 211 5 22 lot 17 13 37 12 84 6 150 1 157 2 5 6 lots 147 15 loud 189 14 louder 90 15 LOVELLS 3 21 4 5 low 179 9 13 203 6 203 21 lunch 102 24 168 3 168 9 Lustberg 2 14 9 7 7 13 1 168 11 169 2 169 4 81 2 20 24 83 18 83 22 84 7 88 8 92 12 14 103 16 107 8 10 110 6 111 22 114 9 115 12 14 121 7 126 16 129 24 131 23 138 21 139 3 6 17 152 9 160 23 25 166 24 173 8 177 20 180 4 17 194 10 200 14 204 12 M marking 76 19 M 2 6 4 4 markings 119 11 machine 211 10 Massachusetts 4 18 Magna 8 19 21 material 189 13 maintain 16 23 matter 8 7 13 3 46 13 129 16 28 25 30 23 31 15 189 12 89 18 141 18 major 28 21 167 25 176 24 makeup 63 16 208 25 man 147 20 158 3 6 matters 16 2 172 19 198 21 managed 72 5 maximum 54 19 146 22 McCain 157 22 management 47 19 158 4 18 159 1 3 190 4 191 5 159 4 11 manipulation Meagan 10 6 149 10 mean 22 5 24 23 map 183 24 28 14 37 13 38 17 March 1 13 8 2 12 39 1 42 24 48 7 18 22 118 10 49 15 52 6 54 18 mark 32 11 14 17 55 24 56 3 4 39 15 51 4 7 15 57 15 59 3 60 7 72 25 76 5 88 4 66 10 67 22 71 1 103 13 126 13 72 17 75 4 15 129 22 131 20 79 19 80 5 85 20 138 18 152 7 86 3 7 87 2 90 7 166 17 173 1 5 95 12 101 24 marked 7 14 15 105 3 22 109 1 3 11 10 22 19 21 113 3 22 120 2 32 19 33 16 18 124 9 136 21 34 7 39 17 23 137 4 147 19 51 10 18 63 24 25 157 5 15 158 3 73 1 3 76 8 21 160 3 19 162 14 Page 13 165 7 10 188 20 194 13 199 17 201 6 207 18 209 3 210 8 meaning 188 14 means 45 23 50 6 54 1 62 5 79 25 94 14 95 13 114 17 115 6 meant 46 19 185 1 199 4 15 measures 107 21 108 3 7 14 114 1 114 2 12 15 115 2 medical 70 5 13 190 24 191 8 medically 145 12 medications 14 22 medium 105 19 179 8 13 203 6 21 meet 19 14 21 3 meeting 19 23 21 17 22 12 25 24 49 1 67 25 69 11 71 19 25 72 12 23 73 8 74 10 75 14 78 23 25 80 3 12 118 10 119 17 181 13 199 18 19 199 23 204 23 205 1 4 208 10 13 meetings 53 8 72 16 meets 58 22 Megan 5 14 members 116 3 160 11 170 13 14 179 12 memo 31 24 35 13 35 18 43 23 55 15 55 22 22 57 2 61 19 62 11 15 96 3 141 9 13 149 12 178 1 15 178 18 18 180 13 181 16 182 4 25 ACLU-RDI p 224 188 14 194 9 204 22 Memorandum 6 23 88 24 115 15 memorialize 186 11 memorializing 72 22 memory 86 7 120 8 mental 40 20 41 7 45 7 25 mention 189 9 mentioned 114 5 130 5 179 2 menu 114 3 met 19 19 21 6 167 16 method 73 12 22 methods 40 3 51 25 74 22 75 1 77 22 106 1 110 13 156 17 MFR 118 10 Michael 53 13 207 9 middle 23 17 40 8 48 24 127 16 132 16 militaries 27 3 military 26 4 millions 197 16 mind 28 14 29 11 46 12 60 17 95 2 118 1 181 25 mine 23 22 minus 65 2 minute 108 9 127 25 minutes 79 20 166 5 181 18 19 191 24 204 13 17 misread 187 17 misrepresentations 116 3 missing 23 19 24 6 misstatements 106 25 107 5 mistake 23 24 mistakes 159 23 25 160 2 7 Mitchell 1 7 4 2 5 13 8 8 9 23 23 13 3 19 7 12 14 19 23 21 4 6 19 21 22 25 24 26 25 27 5 19 22 34 25 38 1 13 17 39 2 41 1 42 5 13 19 42 22 43 5 45 1 5 45 23 46 13 47 7 47 17 21 55 9 61 8 66 18 67 6 68 22 69 7 21 71 10 74 21 25 75 9 13 79 10 13 80 3 7 20 102 11 128 23 151 23 154 16 167 22 169 21 170 4 18 170 21 172 22 174 22 175 11 23 177 2 7 179 19 20 180 13 186 22 187 11 188 2 18 189 2 190 5 193 25 194 9 10 199 13 22 200 4 204 3 205 3 6 207 22 210 4 Mitchell's 176 5 mock 25 12 28 8 55 10 13 19 57 18 57 24 65 2 178 22 183 14 moderate 104 1 Mohamed 95 17 102 18 Mohammed 62 16 63 8 Moller 120 9 186 16 moment 43 9 125 14 Monday 8 12 month 29 6 months 18 24 19 24 21 7 10 22 13 28 19 30 19 41 8 61 18 62 11 62 15 91 18 morning 12 22 23 mouth 164 9 move 166 11 177 8 moving 25 14 multiple 82 11 84 10 91 3 multiply 84 18 mumble 104 22 music 189 14 must-have 56 20 N N 63 19 81 1 83 16 86 8 87 6 104 13 184 7 9 naked 78 7 121 25 name 8 18 25 9 3 12 24 99 13 113 22 166 14 174 23 175 21 22 176 1 5 5 200 3 7 named 172 19 200 2 2 names 90 3 175 9 175 13 16 National 120 2 nature 10 15 70 7 160 12 172 7 207 14 Navy 20 13 near 79 11 181 15 181 15 necessarily 97 5 necessary 19 22 50 24 55 20 necessity 36 1 57 4 57 13 need 16 8 20 11 35 17 56 25 58 22 70 5 79 16 118 2 181 20 needed 56 24 57 22 174 11 negative 42 9 neither 21 21 151 23 200 4 207 22 211 13 never 18 15 28 8 37 22 54 10 57 17 57 21 118 1 143 18 168 1 209 6 new 2 9 9 17 3 23 3 23 7 10 19 4 75 11 20 127 4 129 12 130 9 11 132 8 21 152 11 153 13 186 15 208 7 Newark 2 17 newly 68 16 nine 82 14 nods 14 20 noise 189 14 nomination 68 12 nondisclosure 12 1 North 3 13 27 2 Northwest 1 18 3 5 4 7 18 8 16 Notary 211 23 note 183 13 notion 129 3 November 186 20 nude 74 6 nudity 72 7 14 15 79 14 16 21 25 80 4 14 20 23 93 1 121 13 150 6 205 5 18 number 1 25 8 6 11 11 7 32 15 18 33 17 39 16 47 25 51 9 17 65 14 66 11 68 2 76 7 Page 14 76 22 81 24 84 14 88 7 92 13 98 18 103 15 107 9 17 121 6 125 12 126 15 129 23 131 22 138 20 143 7 145 3 5 22 152 8 160 24 166 23 168 5 169 10 173 6 7 176 19 177 20 178 5 180 5 183 9 183 13 18 186 6 187 1 192 19 194 11 20 25 199 1 200 25 204 12 206 12 165 17 objections 14 5 29 18 objective 140 21 observe 143 16 19 obtain 174 11 obviously 185 21 185 25 occasion 17 5 173 24 occasional 160 4 occasionally 94 18 94 20 occasions 136 3 occurs 208 18 odd 23 18 offer 16 4 offhand 122 21 O office 5 7 6 21 8 15 oath 13 22 24 17 25 18 3 4 7 8 205 13 18 24 19 2 28 24 object 11 24 29 7 28 25 31 10 16 19 41 18 45 9 48 7 31 20 33 1 36 18 50 4 53 24 57 7 37 1 40 1 41 12 60 6 62 5 71 20 42 7 15 60 13 20 78 15 86 20 93 8 60 25 61 2 70 13 94 13 96 12 99 19 76 2 77 13 118 3 100 16 122 3 147 3 170 13 137 16 149 23 178 7 165 2 175 24 officer 135 7 187 6 objection 14 7 23 2 officers 20 13 24 10 26 8 35 16 140 15 142 1 2 36 8 45 16 46 4 7 187 15 19 188 24 46 16 47 23 54 4 190 3 191 4 57 14 60 5 61 9 oh 15 15 21 23 23 65 9 89 12 92 2 25 21 26 18 51 6 93 23 95 19 96 22 65 25 73 1 77 6 97 4 22 98 6 12 79 1 90 20 96 5 99 10 105 21 110 7 125 18 106 6 115 23 152 7 157 21 119 23 122 2 12 199 2 5 204 24 123 3 10 11 124 5 205 2 209 13 124 6 135 13 okay 11 1 13 10 138 14 141 7 16 19 18 15 21 21 142 23 150 11 12 22 23 24 2 15 159 14 161 22 32 24 34 4 18 ACLU-RDI p 225 35 3 36 14 37 18 38 11 39 24 41 5 41 21 43 3 7 46 12 49 11 11 51 11 58 7 61 14 61 23 65 21 68 4 70 18 73 5 74 19 76 4 78 5 22 79 4 79 7 80 25 81 3 82 3 9 25 83 2 21 84 15 21 21 88 10 89 2 7 90 20 24 90 24 92 11 22 95 24 97 12 12 98 20 101 20 102 22 103 22 23 104 16 105 1 5 25 106 4 107 7 15 16 108 11 110 7 10 112 3 113 5 9 114 10 25 115 9 115 16 116 6 14 118 5 8 121 2 11 123 13 23 124 12 125 1 20 21 126 6 126 20 22 127 11 127 21 128 7 129 9 130 2 132 18 20 133 20 137 9 10 138 3 23 139 1 11 20 140 6 140 17 145 4 146 23 24 147 1 149 6 9 150 25 154 19 156 2 7 159 22 161 9 12 162 16 163 6 25 164 5 24 165 8 166 2 8 167 7 12 168 3 9 169 6 15 170 7 16 21 25 171 18 173 16 21 174 17 176 7 11 177 8 15 18 178 22 25 179 18 180 3 19 23 25 182 3 183 12 19 183 21 184 10 185 23 186 8 17 188 2 8 189 6 190 9 191 22 192 4 193 19 194 8 18 22 25 195 23 196 1 10 196 17 197 7 198 14 21 199 5 199 15 200 5 23 201 14 202 1 21 202 24 203 13 20 204 7 11 205 11 205 17 206 5 207 2 15 208 9 209 8 210 10 13 OLC 7 9 30 24 31 24 33 11 36 23 37 3 5 38 21 39 3 39 7 42 23 43 5 46 22 23 47 1 5 48 4 5 49 12 17 50 12 53 9 55 8 55 15 22 57 16 58 10 24 59 9 16 59 23 61 6 62 1 9 62 13 77 21 78 1 101 20 102 3 124 18 138 17 139 22 140 1 141 2 9 12 23 142 16 143 19 146 7 147 13 16 148 15 21 24 149 5 11 18 151 16 169 24 170 19 22 OLC's 38 13 18 42 20 46 14 50 3 169 22 old 81 10 omit 16 16 OMS 40 17 145 8 145 25 146 11 15 146 18 20 once 35 12 48 3 60 11 124 21 133 9 197 22 208 24 ones 19 4 23 8 25 5 25 6 7 47 14 65 18 20 102 11 194 22 one-sided 197 9 14 198 12 open 31 14 160 10 164 9 operated 60 11 operating 100 25 operations 83 4 14 133 14 operators 142 14 opine 182 14 opinion 28 1 30 13 49 12 53 9 121 18 182 20 opinions 150 3 18 176 17 177 3 opportunity 123 1 124 4 133 9 OPR 119 10 12 144 9 146 23 option 108 7 orchestrated 192 21 order 10 9 12 8 49 12 121 14 orders 203 25 organization 17 20 organizations 20 15 origin 20 1 original 7 24 25 47 9 68 18 69 4 6 69 13 22 OTS 31 24 35 13 35 18 40 16 outcome 50 3 13 20 50 25 211 19 outlined 200 1 outrage 121 20 Page 15 150 9 outset 11 18 outside 33 22 68 19 68 21 102 24 128 11 21 22 overseeing 172 6 overselling 31 25 33 3 overused 144 13 21 overwhelming 58 15 o'clock 163 23 164 10 P page 6 4 10 13 7 2 24 1 32 22 35 12 38 10 39 23 40 7 44 16 48 21 24 49 4 61 16 64 20 65 24 69 9 73 10 73 16 74 20 25 76 18 77 1 9 78 24 79 11 82 10 84 7 87 6 89 4 5 6 89 23 90 25 91 3 95 22 97 12 13 98 19 103 21 24 105 7 17 107 14 112 4 8 116 6 11 118 7 14 15 16 20 118 21 121 10 126 19 127 8 24 130 1 15 132 16 134 24 135 17 20 139 14 140 6 146 25 147 6 21 152 23 24 153 7 153 24 154 19 25 157 20 169 17 171 11 177 19 187 1 195 15 199 8 202 6 22 pages 23 15 48 11 48 19 68 6 146 25 171 1 ACLU-RDI p 226 paginated 82 11 84 18 pain 40 20 45 7 25 paper 153 1 172 16 papers 153 2 11 paragraph 16 10 16 13 33 5 8 20 35 11 38 5 9 40 1 40 9 16 42 18 43 24 44 9 46 6 46 20 48 23 49 7 51 21 58 6 61 16 61 20 63 18 73 16 77 3 16 82 21 22 84 19 89 6 90 7 91 7 104 19 105 7 107 17 108 5 10 110 8 11 111 1 112 10 113 7 114 12 121 15 125 10 19 21 126 19 127 1 2 128 16 129 13 130 8 22 133 18 133 19 135 2 136 22 139 2 12 140 8 10 14 141 8 154 25 161 11 13 162 7 168 23 23 168 24 24 24 25 169 10 17 170 17 170 25 171 2 3 7 171 11 18 172 1 174 2 177 19 23 178 5 192 3 12 195 15 196 11 14 197 7 198 16 25 199 6 7 8 paragraphs 32 22 36 6 74 20 168 22 169 7 195 1 196 21 Paralegal 5 14 parse 90 8 part 14 14 23 9 33 10 34 9 47 15 52 7 8 58 9 63 15 64 21 66 3 75 8 76 14 77 7 13 84 3 88 16 92 7 9 95 18 96 20 97 3 97 21 25 98 4 11 99 8 101 9 13 105 8 106 19 20 107 1 108 17 109 8 12 20 23 113 11 17 114 3 120 1 127 25 137 20 21 148 5 158 11 161 9 170 16 172 23 187 11 196 15 207 22 209 23 210 5 participants 90 4 140 19 142 7 25 participate 191 9 191 15 participated 101 1 207 2 5 participation 190 25 203 3 particular 28 10 31 24 50 19 55 6 56 6 15 57 16 63 17 67 3 73 12 88 19 89 17 93 25 96 7 145 23 170 23 particularly 142 8 142 25 particulars 167 24 parties 8 22 10 22 10 23 168 16 211 15 18 partisan 197 18 party 10 8 passed 159 22 paste 180 12 pasted 194 10 Pat 147 4 path 155 8 patient 67 8 Pennsylvania 3 14 people 18 22 19 6 9 19 21 25 28 15 37 5 38 20 48 1 50 23 54 1 62 19 67 7 71 15 75 19 88 12 14 94 15 142 3 9 143 25 144 1 146 21 152 12 159 18 160 5 5 170 11 15 182 21 188 21 193 8 203 6 13 14 208 4 period 20 20 29 3 30 6 18 41 8 59 17 142 21 149 16 173 22 183 6 193 16 207 19 periodic 207 16 periodically 66 22 periods 71 7 161 3 161 14 19 permanently 107 19 permissible 52 2 187 3 8 21 188 9 188 13 permission 103 25 110 20 111 7 permits 168 17 permutations 67 19 persisted 66 7 persistent 41 9 person 99 8 108 1 121 13 17 24 150 7 personal 67 21 68 15 69 1 121 20 150 9 158 5 personally 209 19 210 7 personnel 26 4 70 5 169 24 170 19 172 2 187 7 16 19 192 12 207 11 perspective 158 5 phase 6 19 29 22 29 24 30 2 130 14 132 4 174 12 Philadelphia 3 14 Philbin 147 2 4 6 147 19 148 8 149 21 150 1 Philbin's 147 18 phrase 42 3 56 13 115 6 155 16 physical 40 20 45 7 45 25 190 19 physically 60 2 12 60 18 Pick 169 13 picture 147 23 148 9 piece 172 16 pile 90 19 place 73 8 85 14 166 17 191 3 197 15 203 19 places 203 18 plaintiff 195 24 plaintiffs 1 5 2 3 9 4 6 8 10 12 13 2 101 12 18 168 11 168 12 plan 58 20 91 21 plans 85 2 7 91 19 112 18 129 15 played 117 2 playing 116 22 please 11 2 14 6 9 14 14 32 14 17 39 15 44 5 51 5 90 13 126 13 131 20 138 19 139 15 180 6 point 12 7 15 13 24 30 11 31 23 39 8 Page 16 57 21 59 2 6 62 17 63 19 67 23 106 13 116 15 141 5 149 18 151 3 165 6 176 22 177 17 200 10 pointed 118 21 151 24 points 184 20 policies 153 14 policy 141 10 polite 79 15 political 49 24 Porter 157 24 159 1 4 portion 158 24 posed 11 25 53 9 125 23 posing 57 25 position 22 5 78 7 146 1 185 5 positions 10 16 18 93 3 104 5 9 105 8 positive 108 8 163 15 possibility 54 14 16 62 22 74 22 possible 13 15 20 14 60 1 7 7 171 14 posttraumatic 18 16 41 9 16 42 6 posture 74 7 Post-Isolation 6 19 potential 26 13 116 20 potentially 147 10 147 14 148 18 POW 157 17 powerful 158 6 practice 17 2 practices 153 2 18 153 21 ACLU-RDI p 227 precedents 31 2 precisely 162 25 predated 141 12 predicated 29 14 preference 50 9 preferred 50 13 preliminary 129 17 146 6 premarked 10 25 11 8 premise 124 20 preparation 99 21 186 5 preparatory 80 9 prepare 20 13 prepared 13 5 85 2 85 8 112 18 132 17 167 14 preparing 99 16 presence 70 5 present 5 12 8 22 25 15 66 12 126 5 159 2 201 10 presented 21 19 22 8 15 23 1 24 8 25 11 28 1 36 5 124 13 147 24 148 11 15 151 2 9 151 15 15 181 1 5 181 7 10 182 4 presenters 22 14 presently 168 18 preserve 80 20 president 162 17 162 20 22 163 14 163 19 19 164 12 164 18 21 25 165 14 pressed 132 24 pressure 58 18 135 21 157 3 6 8 190 19 pressures 104 2 110 17 129 16 presumptions 140 23 prevarication 200 11 prevent 117 11 121 14 150 7 previous 28 4 72 17 118 20 130 19 previously 7 14 22 19 21 26 11 33 16 18 34 7 63 25 72 6 73 3 77 21 81 20 24 83 18 22 91 13 92 12 14 107 8 10 111 22 115 17 167 13 180 4 200 14 204 12 primary 185 4 principal 72 16 prior 7 15 17 10 18 10 20 6 21 23 53 17 55 15 181 11 186 5 priori 145 8 prison 205 25 prisoner 121 25 prisoners 27 8 15 77 22 124 3 151 24 152 4 154 12 161 13 205 24 prisons 85 20 203 16 20 privilege 100 19 privileged 10 20 12 5 probability 58 15 probably 48 16 144 14 14 152 23 177 16 181 10 problems 57 25 procedural 89 18 procedure 133 1 7 134 16 192 8 203 9 procedures 40 19 89 21 91 22 112 17 186 1 4 21 proceed 12 15 49 25 168 19 178 19 process 30 22 35 24 36 3 4 17 36 23 40 5 47 4 48 1 4 50 3 11 21 52 4 8 19 58 10 85 14 86 15 89 9 89 22 104 23 131 14 141 23 147 23 148 10 174 13 183 20 185 24 187 12 13 190 2 25 191 3 24 207 3 23 210 5 produce 40 20 41 7 45 25 134 19 produced 81 25 175 14 209 23 25 production 137 20 professional 6 21 76 3 118 4 professionally 146 22 profoundly 107 19 program 11 14 18 20 27 23 50 1 64 18 22 65 5 66 3 8 13 13 19 67 1 6 16 19 21 68 18 69 1 15 15 70 15 23 71 2 12 72 4 75 25 80 24 85 5 18 87 19 88 12 14 16 89 21 90 5 91 23 92 1 7 92 10 93 15 95 18 96 21 97 3 21 25 98 5 11 99 4 9 101 9 21 22 25 102 3 5 11 106 21 108 19 25 109 9 109 13 20 23 113 10 12 14 18 113 20 21 24 25 114 22 23 116 4 116 18 124 12 142 7 25 143 3 9 144 1 145 20 146 12 16 19 21 149 22 151 1 5 157 18 159 7 160 1 5 10 184 23 185 6 194 1 4 4 196 15 25 197 10 197 21 198 4 206 20 23 programs 20 20 27 14 66 2 172 6 prohibit 40 2 prolonged 41 7 promulgate 102 9 promulgation 112 13 properly 137 6 proposed 19 3 21 25 10 40 3 57 20 75 2 proposing 105 18 prosecute 55 1 prosecution 51 24 52 5 53 5 10 17 54 9 24 55 5 protect 10 18 182 21 protected 10 20 12 5 49 22 protecting 201 8 protection 54 20 protest 131 6 proved 65 12 provide 15 19 39 6 42 5 14 46 25 53 5 54 9 132 9 132 22 provided 10 23 31 24 33 1 11 34 21 35 14 39 9 43 4 96 5 19 98 4 Page 17 101 13 133 6 140 1 149 20 177 3 provides 11 12 providing 13 21 58 9 177 7 pry 101 6 psychiatrist 191 14 psychological 63 16 171 14 20 172 10 177 11 190 19 25 191 13 psychologist 154 8 154 9 174 14 175 8 11 22 191 14 200 2 psychologists 22 16 34 21 24 35 8 25 36 7 40 18 25 44 19 20 24 45 22 58 9 13 68 19 22 116 21 117 1 12 117 21 145 11 174 21 176 18 177 2 6 psychology 18 13 18 13 psychopathology 107 18 PTSD 42 14 public 119 15 180 24 211 23 Pull 180 5 purely 101 7 purposes 197 5 put 63 17 94 2 180 13 191 3 putting 16 1 25 14 120 1 puzzling 115 6 P C 2 15 p m 103 5 6 10 206 9 10 14 210 18 20 Q ACLU-RDI p 228 qualifications 22 6 quarter 164 9 Querns 3 9 9 17 17 76 19 77 9 question 12 11 14 13 14 16 29 4 29 8 31 15 32 4 33 24 36 13 40 10 41 25 42 2 53 10 53 25 56 18 59 20 96 16 18 101 4 119 13 121 9 123 18 125 23 137 11 144 17 151 8 163 17 165 12 184 17 209 12 questioned 29 5 30 17 questioning 200 11 questions 10 11 11 19 25 12 3 13 21 14 10 15 3 18 10 29 13 20 30 2 7 34 20 59 3 59 5 137 22 166 15 171 8 13 198 22 201 1 202 8 209 10 quicker 164 7 quickly 166 11 quiet 12 16 90 15 quite 76 6 147 24 148 10 14 209 4 quote 148 14 153 25 155 12 20 quotes 155 13 162 7 quoting 56 1 R Rahman 99 17 101 9 103 20 108 17 23 113 10 113 25 160 15 195 16 16 20 196 2 14 Rahman's 196 3 19 raise 12 12 raised 79 13 208 14 raising 80 14 RDG 89 10 reach 170 22 reached 31 7 128 10 20 141 5 159 18 168 10 reaches 200 9 reacting 81 12 reaction 24 22 149 22 read 16 10 34 15 54 22 95 1 106 22 107 15 108 10 115 18 137 9 17 137 21 155 3 164 20 174 9 188 8 189 16 191 23 192 5 6 reading 36 10 40 7 46 9 79 23 81 7 132 14 136 18 137 13 145 17 189 13 190 9 199 11 real 116 19 really 17 11 12 16 29 9 50 15 75 7 110 24 118 2 136 19 198 5 Realtime 1 24 reason 49 17 75 6 81 14 93 5 11 21 93 25 98 10 99 7 99 11 106 4 112 21 113 5 8 115 20 24 145 8 147 17 184 15 201 17 reasonable 121 17 121 24 recall 16 18 19 23 21 17 20 22 12 25 25 26 19 27 4 27 18 24 30 16 31 11 35 10 37 5 37 12 42 22 43 1 43 1 61 12 63 3 64 12 70 16 72 1 72 9 10 74 9 15 74 18 78 12 79 18 79 20 80 5 13 22 119 6 134 5 143 6 146 18 152 1 3 153 23 154 17 155 15 156 5 172 16 176 16 20 176 23 177 1 179 3 15 204 10 207 25 208 3 recalls 25 24 received 41 15 89 10 150 21 receiving 90 5 recess 43 13 14 103 5 6 206 9 10 recognize 129 4 recollect 141 10 recollection 20 25 21 5 43 4 47 25 63 2 69 19 24 72 3 74 2 15 75 3 77 25 78 3 86 5 6 86 25 87 3 102 14 107 4 108 24 109 5 7 16 22 110 22 112 25 113 3 17 119 5 120 22 126 5 134 7 8 143 23 149 4 7 17 172 12 172 15 177 5 199 25 recommend 58 13 recommendation 108 6 recommendations 34 20 70 13 143 7 recommended 47 8 47 17 18 102 12 126 1 136 1 record 8 5 43 12 16 47 15 73 7 103 3 103 8 166 19 168 14 173 2 18 174 10 175 2 183 16 189 1 190 17 205 11 206 6 8 12 211 12 recording 13 14 recordkeeping 192 19 records 93 14 18 93 22 Recovery 172 2 redact 90 3 redacted 23 10 35 12 40 17 83 5 92 18 96 1 9 174 20 175 9 21 176 1 13 200 19 redaction 84 23 130 22 175 4 redactions 176 4 181 7 reduced 189 11 refer 28 24 33 21 110 7 114 18 197 3 reference 11 21 20 5 105 8 151 5 181 12 190 10 196 22 202 11 referenced 167 9 references 148 7 referral 7 15 22 22 31 18 33 19 64 1 73 4 81 21 83 19 92 15 107 11 referrals 88 11 referred 31 15 114 19 21 120 24 141 9 185 19 referring 46 3 68 22 73 14 82 13 Page 18 160 14 refers 44 18 77 4 158 25 refine 129 17 refined 68 16 69 16 70 24 71 3 102 1 refinement 71 11 refinements 206 20 207 24 reflected 150 19 refresh 75 3 86 25 refreshed 74 14 refreshes 74 2 regard 116 20 117 12 regarding 131 6 regards 130 11 regularly 172 20 related 10 12 116 24 182 11 211 14 relating 177 3 196 3 relative 211 16 relayed 56 16 124 18 release 180 24 relevance 141 14 141 17 relied 144 4 210 8 relying 143 25 remain 205 25 remains 11 14 87 3 113 4 116 12 remark 159 3 remember 15 9 12 19 17 26 18 20 21 31 6 36 16 39 9 41 24 52 3 7 11 52 12 21 53 2 3 7 59 3 6 68 13 70 2 72 13 74 3 75 7 76 9 77 5 79 22 81 11 98 15 99 13 102 20 104 21 108 22 111 21 ACLU-RDI p 229 119 20 22 24 120 15 23 121 1 3 131 18 136 2 3 6 144 16 23 25 145 15 17 20 22 145 25 146 20 147 2 12 15 148 23 151 4 153 17 155 18 157 10 171 12 17 176 22 177 17 198 23 200 5 7 201 1 202 9 204 15 205 1 3 10 205 15 206 21 207 11 208 3 11 reminding 204 18 reminiscent 73 24 removed 178 23 repeat 40 19 123 18 144 17 151 7 163 16 165 11 repeatedly 132 24 135 25 rephrase 14 15 32 7 80 18 87 17 91 23 94 25 119 1 123 21 137 8 report 6 22 24 76 3 76 11 82 1 83 23 83 25 88 1 103 19 105 18 106 5 16 107 5 110 7 111 20 115 10 117 24 118 4 125 2 126 10 134 23 136 15 137 18 19 21 23 137 24 138 8 140 5 15 141 11 141 22 142 15 143 5 6 10 15 145 2 18 21 146 23 148 12 157 19 195 11 196 22 197 4 8 198 10 17 18 reported 1 23 87 20 142 1 146 6 reportedly 85 1 86 2 reporter 8 20 11 2 32 13 39 14 76 24 88 6 156 6 211 1 211 5 reporters 155 15 reports 66 25 106 9 106 20 represent 8 24 9 1 9 4 10 2 9 13 2 representation 45 6 119 18 representations 118 23 represented 13 4 representing 75 13 request 16 17 54 25 96 6 174 13 requested 103 25 110 19 132 25 134 15 requesting 89 10 111 7 requests 31 20 37 9 required 141 6 192 20 research 31 12 153 17 154 11 14 reserve 11 24 resignation 130 24 resist 58 16 141 6 resistance 124 14 128 10 129 4 156 16 18 24 200 10 respect 150 1 155 14 179 24 196 14 207 3 respond 14 8 10 125 22 137 22 responding 28 17 response 11 19 rid 66 1 37 9 10 11 82 1 right 11 24 12 22 83 8 89 15 90 18 15 1 6 12 17 14 91 12 96 6 97 11 22 18 24 2 32 6 115 10 34 11 22 35 15 20 responses 13 22 22 36 25 42 12 43 9 34 20 43 10 21 51 14 22 responsibility 6 22 55 10 56 17 58 4 76 3 118 4 59 15 63 22 64 11 responsible 172 5 64 14 67 24 68 8 188 21 203 14 68 9 11 11 11 11 responsive 59 1 72 24 80 8 81 6 133 10 81 18 83 10 12 24 rest 55 21 57 2 84 24 86 11 11 198 6 87 22 88 20 20 result 42 7 87 25 89 3 90 8 10 21 143 4 10 171 15 90 22 96 9 14 171 15 196 17 97 15 19 100 21 resulted 36 4 101 10 14 103 2 171 21 172 10 111 19 112 11 resulting 177 11 115 9 116 13 196 19 125 8 127 9 results 108 8 128 24 129 14 resumption 126 1 130 8 16 132 2 retribution 49 24 134 1 12 135 1 retrospect 160 9 137 9 139 20 return 16 5 38 3 140 17 143 17 43 18 86 8 111 19 144 2 148 25 114 7 151 11 14 152 15 returned 178 12 153 9 155 1 10 revealing 132 25 156 19 158 12 13 134 15 160 15 163 11 review 38 15 47 5 164 3 16 166 2 90 23 106 20 168 8 169 18 125 5 143 9 146 7 170 8 23 177 8 152 2 20 178 8 179 6 7 9 180 19 207 16 181 11 11 182 16 reviewed 197 16 182 22 25 183 15 207 19 186 2 187 4 25 revised 91 18 188 3 6 16 18 20 reword 29 18 188 23 189 2 14 Rice 67 21 25 68 15 189 17 18 190 7 68 25 71 18 24 190 15 191 6 73 8 75 16 78 23 192 9 13 21 150 20 204 23 193 17 194 6 205 4 195 21 199 6 10 Page 19 199 10 14 202 13 202 14 17 206 5 208 15 16 209 20 209 24 risks 146 3 Rizzo 1 12 6 3 8 1 6 9 2 14 16 10 16 11 3 21 25 12 2 12 22 25 18 48 17 86 22 103 9 12 137 20 166 14 20 166 21 181 17 182 2 184 19 204 14 205 23 206 13 16 209 10 210 17 Rizzo's 6 14 15 17 6 18 7 11 10 13 road 49 23 183 23 ROBERT 3 20 robert bennett@ 3 25 Rodriguez 19 7 14 21 18 170 12 208 5 role 38 13 18 46 14 71 11 116 22 117 2 169 22 170 4 179 23 Rome 1 17 3 4 11 8 15 17 room 12 15 75 22 roughly 19 17 RPR 1 23 rudimentary 28 5 rule 52 23 running 188 21 203 15 16 151 16 19 Salim 1 4 8 7 13 3 102 17 sanctioned 161 15 saw 15 25 201 5 Sayers 5 15 8 18 saying 21 12 39 5 50 11 79 25 88 17 101 2 102 20 105 25 138 6 141 17 155 18 162 7 201 23 says 26 1 35 11 40 11 16 41 6 12 41 22 23 46 10 49 3 51 23 58 20 64 15 73 11 18 74 8 20 25 77 16 77 20 78 5 79 10 79 13 83 2 84 22 84 25 86 1 89 24 91 9 92 24 96 25 97 16 99 1 101 2 103 23 105 23 107 17 108 4 110 12 19 24 112 15 16 20 114 12 15 116 17 118 9 125 22 126 22 129 15 130 3 6 9 21 23 131 5 132 7 21 133 8 12 21 134 14 17 20 135 2 14 17 21 136 23 138 11 140 18 141 3 142 6 6 145 7 146 2 147 8 22 S 148 8 16 25 S 2 14 3 20 149 10 152 25 sadistic 24 16 153 7 11 25 safe 145 12 154 19 155 2 safeguards 69 14 161 2 162 9 69 25 70 3 8 164 25 169 20 safety 35 25 150 22 187 5 14 188 9 ACLU-RDI p 230 190 17 195 16 scenario 63 5 scheduled 15 7 13 15 17 168 18 Schuelke 3 3 9 21 9 21 102 23 168 5 science 153 12 154 11 Scott 120 9 scrub 50 1 second 61 17 69 13 73 10 16 79 11 82 17 21 89 4 98 24 107 14 112 3 116 8 14 126 19 20 130 1 154 24 155 19 19 156 12 157 7 161 10 12 180 5 186 25 206 6 secret 85 20 Secretary 67 20 25 68 15 25 71 18 24 73 8 11 19 74 15 75 16 23 24 78 23 79 14 150 20 204 23 205 4 section 111 16 secure 54 19 60 25 see 13 10 24 5 31 1 32 25 40 22 41 10 49 11 65 17 77 18 77 19 24 82 25 90 6 93 4 98 21 99 1 23 103 23 104 6 17 19 105 1 105 2 6 11 106 2 107 16 112 11 116 7 14 118 17 119 8 121 22 125 18 22 126 2 126 21 127 6 9 128 13 14 19 129 18 19 130 12 130 13 131 2 4 11 131 12 25 133 2 134 1 135 23 137 2 3 7 139 12 140 10 17 18 25 144 8 145 5 13 146 7 147 5 7 11 153 3 9 15 16 154 2 155 1 1 159 19 162 12 164 11 169 18 20 170 1 171 22 173 24 174 2 7 15 176 21 178 2 181 12 18 186 22 186 25 187 2 9 22 188 10 11 190 10 190 13 191 1 192 1 195 16 18 197 1 7 11 198 9 199 9 201 3 seeing 41 24 seek 31 9 52 8 53 23 54 11 101 20 seeking 30 12 52 4 59 23 170 12 seen 34 16 37 20 22 37 23 23 44 7 52 10 76 11 82 7 83 9 23 84 2 90 20 138 23 161 6 Select 196 23 selecting 47 21 self-recognition 200 10 Senate 82 1 1 115 10 21 158 7 196 23 Senator 157 21 158 4 159 1 2 11 sending 144 6 Senior 135 7 sense 24 5 28 20 50 18 90 6 109 10 sensitive 10 15 sensory 104 3 sent 44 1 18 45 21 64 13 81 5 11 15 83 16 85 2 8 109 2 6 111 11 13 111 18 112 18 178 7 sentence 23 17 69 13 155 4 14 19 155 21 162 6 168 23 171 10 19 174 6 177 23 separate 101 21 102 5 5 11 113 10 113 12 13 20 September 153 14 SERE 20 6 9 17 24 21 1 26 22 27 1 6 27 13 23 32 1 33 4 34 21 24 35 8 25 36 7 40 17 25 44 18 20 44 23 45 22 58 9 58 12 150 22 23 151 5 13 17 20 172 6 174 14 21 175 8 11 22 176 18 177 1 6 series 40 13 84 12 189 7 190 14 seriously 143 15 serve 55 5 65 12 served 178 18 Services 8 19 21 70 13 session 135 6 137 1 sessions 130 10 set 68 16 108 12 168 13 169 2 183 8 setting 14 1 seven 21 9 185 7 severe 40 20 45 7 45 25 shackled 74 6 78 6 122 18 shackling 121 13 Page 20 121 24 149 3 5 150 7 Shamsi 2 5 9 9 9 13 1 Sheikh 62 16 63 8 short 130 6 9 shortage 135 3 136 23 shorthand 211 10 shortly 186 19 shot 209 3 show 14 21 22 18 33 15 76 2 81 23 83 21 92 11 172 25 shrunk 71 8 sick 164 11 side 197 17 18 sidedness 197 20 sides 32 12 128 7 signal 12 13 signaled 181 19 signature 210 19 significance 33 3 significant 130 9 143 8 similar 34 13 62 22 62 24 78 14 simply 12 12 109 7 sincerely 150 18 sir 167 2 170 3 173 10 sit 94 1 143 11 205 12 site 44 2 18 45 21 52 13 85 10 16 sites 63 23 64 6 9 81 18 85 19 86 10 203 3 6 15 18 sitting 102 19 114 25 121 23 155 22 185 16 six 21 9 six-month 207 18 skilled 67 8 slap 93 1 2 104 4 4 ACLU-RDI p 231 105 14 sleep 70 19 71 6 7 73 12 19 21 74 6 74 17 23 75 1 11 77 17 78 2 11 13 93 1 104 3 105 11 121 14 149 1 150 7 189 10 slimmed 68 16 slow 55 21 Smith 3 10 5 5 6 6 9 19 19 10 5 12 7 12 18 19 23 2 24 10 25 18 22 26 8 35 16 36 8 46 4 16 47 23 57 14 60 5 61 9 65 9 82 17 22 89 12 90 12 91 1 92 2 20 93 23 95 19 96 12 22 97 4 22 98 6 12 99 10 105 21 106 6 111 24 115 23 116 8 118 11 14 119 23 122 2 12 123 10 124 5 125 15 127 1 128 16 135 13 139 3 14 139 18 141 7 142 23 150 12 153 4 159 14 161 22 163 22 164 3 8 165 17 166 6 8 11 13 15 166 25 169 1 5 173 2 9 174 18 25 175 5 18 20 176 7 176 11 15 180 16 182 1 183 23 184 3 11 193 21 193 24 195 7 9 14 200 24 204 13 18 204 21 205 20 22 206 15 209 9 smith-jt@blankr 3 17 smooth 32 9 social 154 11 solely 182 15 197 17 solemn 13 24 solicited 35 24 solidifying 198 7 solitary 122 25 124 3 solution 155 8 soon 128 9 sophistication 146 6 sorry 8 13 21 8 23 23 23 25 21 33 23 36 20 40 6 42 10 25 45 17 49 7 51 7 15 59 10 61 23 65 2 73 1 15 76 20 23 84 10 90 14 92 20 95 20 109 8 110 4 118 1 19 20 119 1 125 11 126 8 11 127 13 15 128 6 130 14 132 11 12 133 15 135 15 137 7 10 139 14 144 18 151 7 154 22 23 24 158 19 161 6 163 20 165 11 168 4 199 4 202 5 sort 32 9 84 23 173 19 sought 51 24 53 16 53 19 102 1 2 170 11 sounded 24 16 sounds 90 7 10 source 172 8 177 12 178 4 so-called 63 4 87 6 114 6 spasmed 133 11 speak 14 12 39 3 100 3 8 209 19 210 6 speaking 42 22 speaks 41 18 45 10 86 19 113 4 137 24 special 20 12 90 22 125 4 specific 17 21 40 4 42 4 11 16 43 3 51 25 57 9 63 20 70 11 72 1 11 73 22 134 6 136 6 149 6 190 21 24 specifically 26 24 41 2 42 22 72 11 80 13 81 11 98 2 99 18 121 16 136 2 143 12 145 23 148 17 152 25 156 2 176 20 177 14 spent 18 3 spite 109 25 Spokane 1 2 8 10 spoken 164 21 Square 3 12 4 6 SSCI 197 3 8 24 198 17 staff 102 24 188 24 208 6 stage 126 23 128 11 21 stamped 44 17 stamps 84 11 stand 24 18 67 9 69 18 120 18 154 4 155 11 12 161 5 18 162 12 standard 83 3 87 7 87 10 12 111 16 114 6 183 25 188 12 189 7 21 190 20 standardized 102 13 standing 74 6 78 6 standpoint 26 13 stands 107 23 staple 20 19 start 52 9 67 25 187 17 started 163 4 193 16 198 3 starting 72 10 starts 23 16 174 6 180 22 state 8 23 14 6 67 20 68 15 25 73 20 74 16 79 14 171 19 stated 17 4 132 8 133 4 175 17 statement 32 5 5 25 96 3 101 8 109 19 117 16 118 7 119 7 15 25 120 4 120 13 17 23 141 11 147 6 148 2 4 154 4 161 5 statements 101 11 states 1 1 5 2 8 9 10 2 4 7 10 11 7 89 25 118 23 25 119 8 120 5 129 13 130 4 162 17 164 25 174 10 177 24 196 14 211 3 stature 158 4 6 statute 28 5 31 3 40 2 49 20 55 19 stay 182 2 staying 145 2 stenographer 13 11 Steven 2 6 9 11 stipulate 168 16 20 174 19 stipulation 168 10 Page 21 168 13 169 3 8 stop 124 21 24 131 8 133 1 134 16 163 22 169 1 189 14 191 25 193 9 22 205 9 stopped 133 7 strapped 133 8 strategies 52 15 strategy 58 14 Street 1 18 2 8 3 5 3 13 4 7 8 16 stress 18 16 41 9 16 42 6 93 3 104 5 8 105 8 strictly 199 24 strike 198 15 struck 25 12 studied 17 9 18 15 studies 151 24 152 3 study 18 13 83 7 196 24 study's 82 14 Subcommittee 82 2 subject 16 2 79 21 108 14 126 24 127 4 130 3 131 8 132 8 17 133 13 136 1 176 24 198 21 208 14 25 subjected 85 17 86 16 98 22 131 16 152 13 160 5 subjects 58 15 submitted 59 9 16 61 1 5 76 16 subsequent 65 14 subsequently 27 16 53 20 145 24 178 11 substantial 135 21 substituted 176 6 suffering 40 21 ACLU-RDI p 232 45 8 46 1 suffers 107 18 suggest 117 6 suggested 176 18 suggesting 50 10 suggestion 53 4 117 23 suggests 110 16 Suleiman 1 4 8 7 summer 180 25 superior 150 20 supported 140 21 supporting 198 7 supposed 119 2 sure 13 5 17 22 19 10 11 26 11 29 16 19 32 3 34 17 35 20 36 22 38 7 39 10 40 8 40 11 44 8 45 20 48 12 20 50 7 25 52 20 56 5 57 8 59 4 13 60 8 62 4 62 6 66 23 67 2 70 4 12 71 22 73 15 77 6 6 14 78 16 79 10 82 18 88 2 91 2 94 5 16 97 13 98 25 100 23 101 6 103 1 106 22 22 107 3 110 9 116 11 124 10 125 13 132 15 133 17 137 12 139 5 16 141 16 146 17 151 9 152 20 153 7 154 6 157 16 160 16 161 8 162 15 170 14 174 24 179 15 16 192 3 208 5 209 13 surprised 77 20 survival 20 10 suspect 93 21 181 15 sustained 91 11 swear 11 2 sweat 163 4 Sweeney 5 3 10 5 sworn 11 5 211 8 Systems 1 24 S-E-R-E 174 14 S-S-C-I 197 4 target 104 1 tasked 75 10 20 tasks 116 24 taught 67 12 teachers 67 8 team 40 3 18 41 1 44 19 45 22 51 25 52 22 53 6 56 17 57 11 126 24 129 10 15 132 10 132 23 133 13 T 135 8 25 T 3 10 teared 131 9 Tab 87 15 92 12 technique 25 17 138 17 28 9 56 7 15 19 table 105 17 57 16 24 58 21 tailored 63 5 9 10 60 12 63 17 65 17 take 15 2 20 13 70 7 74 17 80 21 38 9 39 18 40 9 104 10 105 9 43 8 45 14 49 25 108 18 149 2 51 3 54 22 56 9 190 21 56 11 68 7 87 15 techniques 19 4 21 104 24 25 125 13 20 1 6 17 22 23 126 6 155 25 21 2 13 19 22 15 156 3 171 6 23 1 11 14 24 6 8 173 21 24 8 16 24 25 10 taken 8 14 43 13 26 2 7 16 22 27 1 103 5 143 15 27 1 6 25 28 18 206 9 211 6 9 16 30 10 14 23 31 14 talk 90 15 155 9 36 1 19 38 14 158 25 159 3 41 15 42 21 45 6 160 13 183 20 45 24 46 15 47 2 184 20 185 23 47 6 7 10 13 16 199 8 47 22 49 19 50 23 talked 66 24 24 55 10 57 19 59 4 69 12 71 3 80 13 59 8 16 24 60 3 145 1 146 21 60 19 61 1 3 4 6 8 167 21 168 1 6 62 22 24 64 21 24 talking 20 3 38 6 65 1 2 6 11 13 21 39 20 49 8 71 13 66 3 7 11 15 90 9 110 10 111 6 67 13 68 17 69 14 140 12 156 6 69 22 71 4 17 25 157 21 173 22 72 2 86 17 87 7 206 23 208 1 4 87 10 11 12 14 talks 110 12 187 2 88 15 90 1 91 10 191 24 91 13 17 22 93 6 94 24 95 14 97 18 97 24 104 18 105 19 108 2 109 11 17 110 18 110 23 111 10 14 111 17 113 1 114 4 14 115 3 116 22 117 2 3 21 124 14 131 17 140 2 142 3 10 150 22 23 151 10 151 17 152 14 153 19 156 17 24 158 16 23 160 6 161 25 169 23 170 5 177 4 178 16 20 180 11 182 10 183 3 8 25 184 1 185 11 187 3 8 21 25 188 3 6 9 13 189 7 19 20 21 190 10 14 18 18 190 20 191 19 25 192 25 193 4 10 194 8 12 19 203 8 204 2 206 24 207 13 tell 12 15 23 12 25 8 26 25 40 6 48 18 54 8 96 2 2 111 1 5 143 12 149 5 18 152 22 171 24 177 21 181 6 185 1 190 1 197 13 199 15 200 21 telling 27 20 144 1 155 15 temperature 160 18 20 161 14 temperatures 161 3 template 65 12 ten 132 4 134 3 tend 12 3 Page 22 Tenet 21 18 26 1 term 48 9 13 49 13 114 17 122 14 22 128 25 156 5 terminate 135 9 terminated 136 9 terminating 137 14 terms 31 2 50 6 14 55 18 85 15 87 10 151 17 160 7 176 10 197 14 terrifying 24 17 Terrorism 18 23 19 10 31 1 188 22 188 25 terrorist 107 25 155 5 terrorists 20 14 terse 157 24 testified 11 5 167 12 182 18 206 18 209 18 testify 14 24 205 13 testifying 13 24 86 23 testimony 13 14 16 171 6 179 3 180 17 203 1 211 7 9 12 text 34 13 thank 12 18 14 4 25 22 34 4 5 43 7 48 22 51 8 57 8 82 5 95 6 112 6 125 19 185 14 195 9 204 18 209 10 thankfully 32 12 theory 199 12 200 1 6 thereto 167 10 168 21 thing 53 23 71 9 102 15 166 16 things 29 9 37 15 51 2 54 1 70 7 ACLU-RDI p 233 94 15 100 22 102 21 106 11 137 17 138 6 157 16 160 11 172 7 178 6 207 14 think 17 4 25 6 7 39 10 47 24 48 16 50 22 51 5 63 1 68 3 76 21 78 13 83 24 87 2 89 4 90 18 100 1 20 113 9 117 22 121 23 122 7 10 122 13 17 128 4 128 15 139 5 159 23 25 164 24 165 13 166 3 3 167 3 12 182 18 183 16 184 21 24 184 24 185 19 205 14 third 3 22 161 10 162 6 6 174 2 Thirteenth 4 7 Thirty-four 16 21 16 22 thought 19 22 28 3 28 9 50 23 72 18 80 23 95 23 104 23 106 24 154 22 156 9 159 19 thousands 26 4 threat 28 20 130 11 threats 127 5 129 12 130 4 131 7 three 141 12 202 7 204 13 17 tight 163 3 time 8 13 15 2 18 16 22 17 13 18 9 18 11 19 13 16 20 17 20 21 8 22 1 24 20 21 25 7 9 10 10 15 27 18 28 14 30 6 30 8 11 12 36 10 37 23 39 8 40 9 43 11 56 9 11 59 11 23 62 17 63 13 67 3 70 12 70 19 71 12 13 15 75 23 80 16 95 6 102 21 25 103 9 106 8 24 117 14 119 14 120 10 124 24 132 9 22 134 2 136 10 18 142 21 147 10 14 148 19 153 18 154 20 155 3 6 17 155 24 156 10 11 164 4 173 22 176 22 181 13 15 183 6 184 17 193 16 198 6 203 5 5 12 12 206 13 207 9 208 8 209 5 210 17 timeline 141 20 times 7 10 37 5 13 54 6 82 12 106 10 152 12 16 193 6 207 15 208 22 today 8 12 10 5 9 10 18 13 5 12 21 14 24 15 14 15 102 19 114 25 121 23 143 11 155 22 167 16 19 167 22 180 18 201 4 205 12 told 19 3 20 21 1 26 21 27 5 29 3 53 14 67 2 102 21 102 23 131 5 18 146 13 18 148 22 148 23 24 149 15 149 17 151 12 152 16 159 4 6 200 6 top 69 10 103 24 106 2 110 11 127 15 130 7 177 19 207 20 topics 10 12 torture 17 6 28 4 31 3 49 19 55 18 157 24 158 8 159 19 160 18 21 161 4 17 20 21 162 2 10 18 163 15 19 20 164 19 22 165 1 165 16 tortured 158 12 15 158 23 159 12 total 149 15 totally 106 10 tough 25 3 trained 67 15 trainers 67 8 training 18 12 20 9 20 12 18 20 24 21 1 26 17 23 27 13 33 4 67 6 151 13 20 153 22 172 7 transcribe 13 11 transcribed 211 11 transcript 7 25 13 17 14 21 168 17 transcription 211 11 transgress 54 16 treat 13 23 120 6 treated 55 13 118 25 119 16 120 5 treatment 120 6 122 18 trial 13 15 168 18 trouble 56 12 149 21 25 150 10 150 13 true 170 3 6 17 193 25 196 13 198 16 202 21 204 3 205 14 211 12 Trump 162 22 163 14 164 12 18 164 22 165 14 truthful 16 14 truthfully 14 24 try 90 15 100 14 104 22 trying 38 24 46 20 48 8 101 15 137 9 137 25 162 22 25 turn 89 3 5 23 90 17 98 19 107 7 110 3 116 6 119 13 127 8 11 130 1 135 17 20 166 4 169 9 177 18 198 25 200 13 202 5 204 11 turned 30 23 48 3 202 22 turning 44 15 61 14 98 17 105 16 125 1 127 23 140 4 turns 40 12 two 15 17 18 4 23 16 28 10 68 18 68 21 69 10 72 17 91 14 25 97 21 141 14 171 1 176 4 193 3 type 174 22 175 12 typed 81 8 types 179 6 typically 78 6 U U 72 20 79 6 Uh-huh 21 14 33 7 Page 23 72 8 79 12 87 8 91 8 128 2 131 3 151 18 ultimate 185 22 ultimately 91 17 97 18 24 182 24 unable 133 24 unauthorized 10 19 87 25 88 2 88 13 94 12 178 16 204 1 9 unclassified 11 16 180 24 undergoing 202 12 underneath 175 4 176 3 understand 10 11 13 18 14 2 13 15 1 16 7 20 8 9 20 16 21 25 25 33 24 40 16 24 41 20 45 13 56 2 86 3 89 21 105 4 113 23 128 25 137 4 138 1 194 20 197 25 201 7 understanding 12 9 26 15 27 21 28 6 50 10 55 3 55 12 14 58 24 60 10 67 11 17 78 10 80 17 19 83 13 17 85 4 23 87 10 16 93 16 17 94 5 10 98 14 104 8 109 25 111 12 114 13 16 115 1 116 25 121 17 129 2 136 12 13 15 137 12 151 22 172 3 5 177 24 179 25 185 24 192 24 200 9 understood 14 17 ACLU-RDI p 234 56 4 underwent 92 25 96 24 97 6 99 2 undignified 72 18 unduly 72 18 UNION 2 7 unique 158 4 United 1 1 5 2 8 9 10 2 4 7 10 11 7 118 23 25 119 7 120 5 129 13 130 4 162 17 164 25 211 3 unrecognizable 201 6 unremitting 197 9 Unruh 4 3 9 15 15 urgency 29 4 USA 6 10 use 18 19 20 17 23 21 24 25 26 16 26 22 48 9 13 56 6 58 21 59 24 60 2 12 67 12 70 14 72 7 87 24 89 11 16 92 6 93 7 94 7 17 95 9 95 10 102 10 17 105 18 109 18 111 14 112 13 114 1 2 122 22 135 22 136 9 140 1 142 22 150 23 165 15 171 15 21 172 10 177 11 183 24 187 7 20 189 13 190 20 23 useless 200 11 uses 209 22 utilized 191 20 U S 4 13 17 26 4 84 13 112 9 114 8 119 16 122 24 124 2 131 7 139 18 173 3 202 6 121 14 150 6 views 42 6 14 V 146 19 159 13 v 1 6 13 3 164 12 vaguely 70 17 75 4 violate 49 19 75 4 violated 55 1 4 valuable 80 23 violation 203 25 value 19 1 65 15 Virginia 153 8 85 16 21 104 1 virtually 201 6 105 20 107 24 vital 50 24 108 17 179 1 2 8 vividly 205 2 179 9 13 13 21 24 voice 25 19 44 4 180 2 182 9 12 88 3 90 13 114 20 183 4 10 193 1 118 22 158 7 196 8 203 6 21 21 voluntary 76 16 206 25 volunteers 150 24 variation 21 2 151 20 153 22 various 72 16 W 203 4 wait 14 6 9 61 17 verbalize 14 19 79 1 108 9 127 25 verdict 157 18 24 waived 210 19 159 11 Walcott 5 4 10 6 verifiable 135 3 walk 44 16 136 24 vernacular 203 17 walling 90 1 93 3 want 12 15 35 22 version 23 21 43 18 45 14 48 12 119 10 144 9 57 1 68 6 91 6 159 7 110 8 162 12 versus 8 7 164 8 165 9 19 video 13 17 210 17 166 16 16 168 13 videographer 5 15 169 15 173 16 8 4 19 11 1 13 13 174 1 5 178 25 43 11 15 103 3 7 179 18 180 18 206 7 11 210 16 181 22 183 17 17 Videotape 8 5 183 20 184 19 20 103 8 206 12 185 23 191 17 VIDEOTAPED 195 1 10 204 25 1 12 wanted 48 5 49 12 videotapes 178 8 49 16 21 50 15 25 178 10 10 54 19 57 1 62 21 Vietnamese 27 3 67 21 68 15 17 view 50 19 57 3 12 69 1 3 75 25 92 5 150 19 80 20 130 16 158 10 165 24 135 9 155 7 8 185 10 157 9 11 182 20 viewed 26 12 193 9 205 8 wants 164 10 184 1 war 27 8 15 151 25 152 4 154 12 194 15 Warden 4 16 9 25 9 25 11 9 12 8 17 175 2 16 19 176 3 176 8 200 19 Washington 1 1 19 3 6 4 8 19 5 8 8 10 16 wasn't 19 11 22 5 30 17 31 8 37 14 113 16 17 19 120 18 130 19 156 10 186 22 189 23 199 21 water 90 2 93 2 131 8 149 10 waterboard 25 11 28 7 57 4 13 16 57 23 58 22 25 59 5 70 14 71 5 132 18 23 135 6 137 1 144 13 21 145 9 waterboarded 133 10 134 6 11 134 21 waterboarding 25 17 134 3 9 137 5 194 14 Watt 2 6 9 11 11 13 2 way 24 24 26 12 48 16 50 16 20 60 11 62 7 63 10 67 20 69 15 70 23 72 4 78 4 79 22 98 14 124 12 146 10 163 15 193 15 194 6 195 20 205 16 209 15 ways 26 16 Page 24 week 134 9 weeks 15 17 went 49 17 66 23 81 18 86 9 12 101 25 182 19 185 9 weren't 37 14 88 18 161 24 170 22 194 1 2 23 we've 81 24 163 22 whatsoever 52 23 white 120 1 12 189 14 199 18 19 199 23 wholesale 197 9 wife 164 11 withhold 135 12 18 withholding 140 20 156 14 157 13 witness 3 19 6 3 9 1 11 2 4 20 12 13 22 23 23 3 5 24 2 24 12 25 21 26 10 33 7 35 3 17 36 9 36 14 37 18 41 22 41 25 43 10 45 17 46 9 18 47 24 54 2 5 57 15 61 11 21 65 10 73 5 76 9 78 19 79 7 82 25 89 13 90 14 92 3 22 93 10 24 94 17 95 20 96 14 23 97 5 23 98 7 13 99 11 105 1 4 6 105 22 106 7 111 25 114 21 115 24 116 9 118 12 15 17 119 24 122 5 7 13 123 5 13 124 8 127 16 21 138 9 138 11 139 7 20 141 8 142 24 144 17 149 25 ACLU-RDI p 235 150 13 153 5 159 15 161 23 163 6 164 4 10 165 11 18 20 184 10 200 23 204 20 209 10 211 7 9 13 word 22 10 31 10 50 5 53 25 64 16 80 10 81 7 84 22 94 14 17 25 156 4 163 15 words 81 12 82 14 138 7 155 18 178 15 work 62 3 74 25 77 13 85 12 worked 15 23 25 85 5 working 195 10 works 162 18 164 19 165 1 world 121 18 194 15 worthless 198 5 worthwhile 146 22 wouldn't 24 25 37 6 129 6 142 10 165 20 171 7 185 16 write 68 14 21 69 9 70 22 108 21 157 18 writes 121 12 writing 50 16 69 20 74 12 186 1 21 written 49 12 85 1 85 7 103 24 111 2 112 17 121 4 143 5 172 17 wrong 118 21 wrote 99 17 108 16 127 24 128 8 X Xenakis 153 1 9 Y yeah 105 22 136 11 185 3 year 18 3 168 19 years 16 20 22 18 4 20 3 26 5 41 8 66 19 23 67 18 68 20 69 16 70 9 70 24 72 17 81 10 101 25 141 12 149 16 157 17 159 22 168 5 185 7 197 15 22 Yep 140 16 yield 108 7 Yoo 55 16 56 22 57 23 York 2 9 9 3 23 23 7 10 152 11 Y-O-O 55 16 Z Zubaydah 18 25 21 24 28 16 29 4 29 5 30 1 35 9 52 15 62 23 63 6 63 10 11 12 65 2 65 7 11 12 19 85 22 102 12 129 11 134 4 135 6 9 18 136 9 137 13 156 20 21 156 25 177 25 178 9 14 182 5 7 182 15 Zubaydah's 6 20 7 3 5 7 29 23 126 6 128 10 131 14 0 02 127 19 03 86 11 184 6 07102 2 17 1 1 6 11 8 6 10 25 11 7 10 35 12 43 23 55 16 61 19 178 1 1C 121 15 1st 181 11 1 23 17 6 14 15 10 7 21 83 19 22 89 5 6 111 23 24 125 7 10th 127 9 14 10 06 1 14 8 13 10 50 43 12 13 10 57 43 14 15 100 118 7 16 10004 2 9 10022 3 23 103 6 24 1057 114 9 107 7 23 11 6 5 11 65 2 89 23 130 13 138 17 178 19 193 4 11th 153 14 1160 51 3 1172 64 20 105 7 12 23 11 24 8 47 9 47 14 16 59 8 61 2 4 65 1 178 19 180 11 182 10 183 13 194 8 195 15 12 12 103 4 5 12 57 103 6 10 121 6 25 122 84 20 112 10 125 2 8 126 7 4 76 18 77 10 77 16 1287 103 21 110 9 129 7 6 13 87 15 130 3 13 131 7 8 1360 145 3 4 138 7 9 1392 84 8 9 112 9 14 81 10 211 25 14th 7 6 130 17 140 146 25 147 1 6 141 147 21 1422 125 10 17 1423 134 24 1443 140 7 9 1444 140 7 10 15 20 3 149 16 152 7 10 1567 98 19 202 22 1580 92 19 21 95 22 24 1581 202 6 16 92 12 132 3 134 11 160 7 11 166 6 6 16 17 7 16 22 20 22 65 22 105 17 180 5 7 8 18 183 9 194 11 173 7 12 1763 39 23 44 17 18 7 17 33 17 19 58 3 191 24 198 25 199 7 18th 2 8 3 13 1825 1 18 3 5 8 15 188 48 21 49 4 5 19th 7 8 132 1 19103 3 14 1913 173 4 1914 173 4 192 128 14 193 127 24 128 15 2 2 87 6 103 8 104 19 164 9 192 3 2nd 127 18 2 15-cv-286-JLQ 1 6 8 11 2 56 206 7 9 Page 25 20 1 13 4 18 8 2 12 8 13 91 12 20004 4 8 20006 1 19 3 6 8 16 2001 17 7 2002 17 7 8 10 18 18 10 21 43 23 55 16 59 17 60 4 61 3 7 19 127 20 147 9 13 16 25 148 11 15 24 178 1 181 1 12 193 16 2003 64 18 22 81 6 83 4 14 89 25 118 10 141 22 142 21 185 25 186 15 2004 193 17 18 2006 71 2 8 2007 7 9 67 20 141 23 142 16 2017 1 13 8 2 12 166 21 167 5 202-616-5084 4 20 202-637-5600 4 9 202-772-5815 3 7 2021 211 25 20505 5 8 20530 4 19 206 125 10 21 209 6 7 135 2 136 22 21 7 20 81 21 24 90 19 91 2 115 14 126 8 8 212-284-7303 2 10 212-918-3000 3 24 215-569-5674 3 15 22 7 16 38 9 42 18 168 22 169 10 17 170 17 171 3 226 125 15 23 166 21 167 5 2340 126 9 239 118 13 ACLU-RDI p 236 24 118 10 169 17 242 157 20 21 25 116 6 11 26 89 6 145 5 262 139 17 264 140 8 10 269 68 6 27 181 19 270 68 6 69 9 3 3 107 17 114 12 121 10 11 16 130 22 163 23 164 10 192 12 206 12 3 00 206 10 14 3 04 210 18 20 305772 1 25 31 168 23 170 25 171 2 7 319 139 2 8 16 18 32 6 14 33 7 17 34 7 23 107 9 11 114 9 35 6 17 7 19 73 2 4 204 12 20 22 38 7 18 32 22 63 24 64 1 3 81 2 183 18 22 23 186 2 6 187 1 39 32 22 33 8 169 10 11 177 20 194 25 195 3 8 199 4 45A 6 15 166 18 20 166 23 169 11 46 6 17 39 15 16 199 1 2 4 47 6 18 51 5 9 16 51 16 68 3 127 12 48 6 19 51 12 17 168 24 177 19 23 178 5 49 6 21 76 6 7 24 76 25 7 32 22 40 1 9 51 21 70 168 24 196 14 703-874-3123 5 9 72 189 10 73 7 19 76 6 22 77 168 24 196 21 197 7 78 168 25 196 22 198 16 8 8 181 12 81 7 20 92 19 21 5 83 7 21 198 17 5 36 6 152 24 153 7 875 3 22 192 19 19 88 6 23 50 6 23 61 16 21 22 9 88 5 6 7 10 9 61 16 177 19 51 6 18 20 24 9th 7 4 103 14 15 110 6 9 11 28 19 172 4 52 6 25 121 5 6 92 7 22 152 7 94 134 25 53 7 3 126 15 973-596-4415 2 18 54 7 5 129 23 55 7 7 131 21 22 555 4 7 56 7 9 90 25 91 3 97 13 138 20 139 7 56s 91 3 57 7 10 152 7 8 58 7 11 82 10 13 160 23 24 59 7 12 173 6 7 10 173 11 176 19 4 4 36 6 38 10 58 6 126 19 127 1 2 129 13 192 19 20 6 199 8 40 168 23 171 11 6 32 22 36 6 129 10 171 18 152 23 154 19 43 140 12 13 166 5 63 7 18 44 7 22 43 24 92 13 69 168 24 195 15 92 15 98 18 196 11 140 12 200 14 15 7 45 6 14 32 17 18 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