The Senate Intelligence Committee Report on Torture: Committee Study of the Central Intelligence Agency's Detention and Interrogation Program (92 page)

1307.
Italics included in CIA Memorandum to the Office of Legal Counsel, entitled, “Effectiveness of the CIA Counterterrorist Interrogation Techniques,” from March 2, 2005.
See also
CIA talking points for National Security Council entitled, “Talking Points for 10 March 2005 DCI Meeting PC: Effectiveness of the High-Value Detainee Interrogation (HVDI) Techniques,” dated March 4, 2005, as well as multiple other CIA briefing records and memoranda described in Volume II.

1308.
From 2003 through 2009, the CIA’s representations regarding the effectiveness of the CIA’s enhanced interrogation techniques provided a specific set of examples of terrorist plots “disrupted” and terrorists captured that the CIA attributed to information obtained from the use of its enhanced interrogation techniques. CIA representations further asserted that the intelligence obtained from the use of the CIA’s enhanced interrogation techniques was unique, otherwise unavailable, and resulted in “saved lives.” Among other CIA representations, see: (1) CIA representations in the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel Memorandum, dated May 30, 2005, which relied on a series of highly specific CIA representations on the type of intelligence acquired from the use of the CIA’s enhanced interrogation techniques to assess their legality. The CIA representations referenced by the OLC include that the use of the CIA’s enhanced interrogation techniques was “necessary” to obtain “critical,” “vital,” and “otherwise unavailable actionable intelligence” that was “essential” for the U.S. government to “detect and disrupt” terrorist threats. The OLC memorandum further states that “[the CIA] ha[s] informed [the OLC] that the CIA believes that this program is largely responsible for preventing a subsequent attack within the United States.” (See Memorandum for John A. Rizzo, Senior Deputy General Counsel, Central Intelligence Agency, from Steven G. Bradbury, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel, May 30, 2005, Re: Application of United States Obligations Under Article 16of the Convention Against Torture to Certain Techniques that May Be Used in the Interrogation of High Value al Qaeda Detainees.) (2) CIA representations in the Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel Memorandum dated July 20, 2007, which also relied on CIA representations on the type of intelligence acquired from the use of the CIA’s enhanced interrogation techniques. Citing CIA documents and the President’s September 6, 2006, speech describing the CIA’s interrogation program (which was based on CIA-provided information), the OLC memorandum states: “The CIA interrogation program—and, in particular, its use of enhanced interrogation techniques—is intended to serve this paramount interest [security of the Nation] by producing substantial quantities of otherwise unavailable intelligence . . . As the President explained [on September 6, 2006], ‘by giving us information about terrorist plans we could not get anywhere else, the program has saved innocent lives.’” (See Memorandum for John A. Rizzo, Acting General Counsel, Central Intelligence Agency, from Steven G. Bradbury, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel, July 20, 2007, Re: Application of the War Crimes Act, the Detainee Treatment Act, and Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions to Certain Techniques that May Be Used by the CIA in the Interrogation of High Value al Qaeda Detainees.) (3) CIA briefings for members of the National Security Council in July and September 2003 represented that “the use of Enhanced Techniques of one kind or another had produced significant intelligence information that had, in the view of CIA professionals, saved lives,” and warned policymakers that“[t]ermination of this program will result in loss of life, possibly extensive.” (See August 5, 2003 Memorandum for the Record from Scott Muller, Subject: Review of Interrogation Program on 29 July 2003; Briefing slides, CIA Interrogation Program, July 29, 2003; September 4, 2003, CIA Memorandum for the Record, Subject: Member Briefing; and September 26, 2003, Memorandum for the Record from Muller, Subject: CIA Interrogation Program.) (4) The CIA’s response to the Office of Inspector General draft Special Review of the CIA program, which asserts: “Information [the CIA] received . . . as a result of the lawful use of enhanced interrogation techniques (‘EITs’) has almost certainly saved countless American lives inside the United States and abroad. The evidence points clearly to the fact that without the use of such techniques, we and our allies would [have] suffered major terrorist attacks involving hundreds, if not thousands, of casualties.” (See Memorandum for: Inspector General; from: James Pavitt, Deputy Director for Operations; subject: re (S) Comments to Draft IG Special Review, “Counterterrorism Detention and Interrogation Program” 2003-7123-IG; date: February 27, 2004; attachment: February 24, 2004, Memorandum re Successes of CIA’s Counterterrorism Detention and Interrogation Activities.) (5) CIA briefing documents for CIA Director Leon Panetta in February 2009,which state that the “CIA assesses that the RDI program worked and the [enhanced interrogation] techniques were effective in producing foreign intelligence,” and that “[m]ost, if not all, of the timely intelligence acquired from detainees in this program would not have been discovered or reported by other means.” (See CIA briefing documents for Leon Panetta, entitled, “Tab 9: DCIA Briefing on RDI Program—18FEB.2009” and graphic attachment, “Key Intelligence and Reporting Derived from Abu Zubaydah and Khalid Shaykh Muhammad (KSM),” including “DCIA Briefing on RDI Program” agenda, CIA document “EITs and Effectiveness,” with associated documents, “Key Intelligence Impacts Chart: Attachment (AZ and KSM),” “Background on Key Intelligence Impacts Chart: Attachment,” and “supporting references,” to include “Background on Key Captures and Plots Disrupted.”) (6) CIA document faxed to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence on March 18, 2009, entitled, “[SWIGERT] and [DUNBAR],” located in Committee databases at DTS #2009-1258, which provides a list of “some of the key captures and disrupted plots” that the CIA had attributed to the use of the CIA’s enhanced interrogation techniques, and stating: “CIA assesses that most, if not all, of the timely intelligence acquired from detainees in this program would not have been discovered or reported by any other means.” See Volume II for additional CIA representations asserting that the CIA’s enhanced interrogation techniques enabled the CIA to obtain unique, otherwise unavailable intelligence that “saved lives.”

1309.
CIA document dated March 4, 2005, entitled, “Briefing for Vice President Cheney: CIA Detention and Interrogation Program.” The briefing document further represented that: (1) “Prior to the use of enhanced measures against skilled resistors [sic] like KSM and Abu Zubaydah—the two most prolific intelligence producers in our control—we acquired little threat information or significant actionable intelligence”; and (2) “[CIA] would not have succeeded in overcoming the resistance of KSM, Abu Zubaydah, and other equally resistant HVDs without the application of EITs.”

1310.
Italics added. CIA records indicate that Abu Zubaydah never provided information on “two operatives already in the United States.” While neither Binyam Muhammad nor Jose Padilla was “already in the United States,” the OLC description appears to be a reference to Jose Padilla and Binyam Mohammad, as the OLC then makes reference to the “Dirty Bomb” and “Tall Buildings” plotting.

1311.
Italics added. See Memorandum for John A. Rizzo, Acting General Counsel, Central Intelligence Agency, from Steven G. Bradbury, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel, July 20, 2007, Re: Application of the War Crimes Act, the Detainee Treatment Act, and Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions to Certain Techniques that May Be Used by the CIA in the Interrogation of High Value al Qaeda Detainees.

1312.
See “Waterboarding Saved L.A.,”
Washington Times
, April 25, 2009. The CIA’s June 2013 Response asserts that it “took [the CIA] until 2007 to consistently stop referring to [Padilla’s] ‘Dirty Bomb’ plot—a plan [the CIA] concluded early on was never operationally viable.” As noted, the CIA continued to refer to the “Dirty Bomb” plotting through 2007 and confirmed the information publicly in 2009.

1313.
See list of CIA prepared briefings and memoranda from 2003 through 2009 with representations on the effectiveness of the CIA’s enhanced interrogation techniques referenced in this summary and described in detail in Volume II.

1314.
See, for example, █████████████; CIA document entitled, “CIA Statement Summarizing Significant Information About Jose Padilla (21:10 hrs.- 8 June 02)”; ████ 10972 (12031Z APR 02); ALEC ███ (231837Z APR 02); and ████ 10976 (120948Z APR 02); among other records.

1315.
Federal Bureau of Investigation documents pertaining “to the interrogation of detainee Zayn Al Abideen Abu Zabaidah” and provided to the Select Committee on Intelligence by cover letter dated July 20, 2010 (DTS# 2010-2939).
See also
█████ 10092 (211031Z APR 02). While Abu Zubaydah was subjected to sleep deprivation and nudity prior to this date by the CIA, he had been allowed to sleep shortly prior to being questioned on this matter by the FBI special agents, who were exclusively using rapport-building interrogation techniques when the information was acquired from Abu Zubaydah (who was covered with a towel). The sleep deprivation and nudity as implemented during this period differed from how sleep deprivation and nudity were implemented after the CIA developed, and the Department of Justice approved, the CIA’s “enhanced interrogation techniques” in August 2002. Rather than being placed in a stress position during sleep deprivation, Abu Zubaydah was kept awake by being questioned nearly non-stop by CIA and FBI interrogators. Records further indicate that during breaks in the interrogations, Abu Zubaydah was allowed to briefly sleep.
See also
████ 10116 (250731Z APR 02), which describes this sleep deprivation as a period of “no sustained sleep” with “cat naps between interrogators.” The cable further states: “Like many medical students, the subject appears to handle 76 plus hours of
limited sleep
with few problems” (italics added). The use of nudity during this period also differed from future uses of nudity, as Abu Zubaydah was covered when interrogated by the FBI.
See also
SSCI Staff interview of FBI Special Agent Ali Soufan, April 28, 2008, at 1:20 PM, Hart Senate Office Building (transcript at DTS #2008-2411). Ali Soufan described events prior to Abu Zubaydah’s provision of information related to the “Dirty Bomb,” stating: “He was injured, badly injured. He was dehydrated. I remember we were putting ice on his lips. And he didn’t have any bowel control, so we were cleaning him. And the reason I’m telling you some of these disgusting things is because it helped build rapport with the guy in this short period of time.” Later, Ali Soufan described the provision of information related to the Dirty Bomb plotting, stating: “When I was going in, he was totally naked. I refused to go and interview him naked. So I took a towel. And ███ and I and [REDACTED], every time we went in he had to be covered or I [wouldn’t] go. It’s as simple as that.”
See also
section of transcript stating, “So we went back. And we start talking to him. We took some Coke, tea, and we start talking about different things. We flipped him about different things, ███ and I and [REDACTED]. And then he came back to his senses and he started cooperating again. And this is when he gave us Padilla.” (Abu Zubaydah provided information concerning the Dirty Bomb plotting and Jose Padilla’s
kunya
, but did not provide the name “Jose Padilla.” As described in this summary, Jose Padilla’s name had already been provided to the CIA by a foreign government that identified Padilla as a U.S. citizen suspected of being engaged in possible terrorist activity.)
See also
Abu Zubaydah detainee review in Volume III.

1316.
The Department of Justice finalized its approval of the CIA’s enhanced interrogation techniques, including walling, facial slaps, wall standing, stress positions, sleep deprivation, and the waterboard, as well as other techniques, on August 1, 2002. See Volume I and Volume III for additional details. Beginning on August 4, 2002, and extending through August 20, 2002, Abu Zubaydah was subjected to the non-stop concurrent use of the CIA’s enhanced interrogation techniques, including at least 83 applications of the waterboard. CIA records indicate that the use of the CIA’s enhanced interrogation techniques ceased on August 30, 2002, when Abu Zubaydah received clothing.

1317.
See intelligence chronology in Volume II, to include: (1) email from: [REDACTED] ███OTA/CTWG/CBRN Group; to: [REDACTED] and multiple ccs, including ██████; subject: “Re: [REDACTED]: Re: KSM homework on AQ nuke program”; date: April 22, 2003, at 03:30 PM, explaining CIA’s CBRN group’s position on Padilla and Mohammed’s plotting; “Padilla and Binyam/Zouaoui had pulled an article off a satirical web site called ‘How to make an H-bomb’ which is based on a 1979 Journal of Irreproducible Results article. The article was intended to be humorous . . . ”; (2) email from: [REDACTED], CTC/OTA/CBRNB; subject: “Note to Briefers Updating Zubaydah ‘Uranium Device’ Information”; date: April 23, 2003, at 08:25:40 PM; and (3) U.K. court records relaying that “[Binyam Mohammed] at the outset said there was no Dirty Bomb plot (a position he has consistently maintained to his defense lawyers)” (UK Judgment, at 39). According to U.K. legal records, “[Binyam Mohammed] said . . . that he had seen a file on a computer in Lahore and decided it was a joke—part of the instruction included adding bleach to uranium 238 in a bucket and rotating it around one’s head for 45 minutes.” (UK Judgment, at 11). On June 10, 2002, then–Attorney General John Ashcroft announced, “We have captured a known terrorist who was exploring a plan to build and explode a radiological dispersion device, or ‘dirty bomb,’ in the United States.” The statement continued: “In apprehending Al Muhajir as he sought entry into the United States, we have disrupted an unfolding terrorist plot to attack the United States by exploding a radioactive ‘dirty bomb.’ Now, a radioactive ‘dirty bomb’ involves exploding a conventional bomb that not only kills victims in the immediate vicinity, but also spreads radioactive material that is highly toxic to humans and can cause mass death and injury. From information available to the United States government, we know that Abdullah Al Muhajir is an Al Qaeda operative and was exploring a plan to build and explode a radioactive dirty bomb. Let me be clear: We know from multiple independent and corroborating sources that Abdullah Al Muhajir was closely associated with Al Qaeda and that as an Al Qaeda operative he was involved in planning future terrorist attacks on innocent American civilians in the United States . . . I commend the FBI, the CIA and other agencies involved in capturing Abdullah Al Muhajir before he could act on his deadly plan.” See Transcript of the Attorney General John Ashcroft Regarding the Transfer of Abdullah Al Muhajir (Born Jose Padilla) to the Department of Defense as an Enemy Combatant, on June 10, 2002.