The Continuity of Addington’s Man-Sized Safe

/21 Comments/in /by

The CIA IG Report provides this narrative of the CIA’s past involvement with interrogation techniques.

In the early 1980s, a resurgence of interest in teaching interrogation techniques developed as one of several methods to foster foreign liaison relationships. Because of political sensitivities the then-Deputy Director of Central Intelligence (DDCI) forbade Agency officers from using the word "interrogation." The Agency then. developed the Human Resource Exploitation (HRE) training program designed to train foreign liaison services on interrogation techniques.

In 1984, OIG investigated allegations of misconduct on the part of two Agency officers who were involved in interrogations and the death of one individual [redacted] Following that investigation, the Agency took steps to ensure Agency personnel understood its policy on interrogations, debriefings, and human rights issues. Headquarters sent officers to brief Stations and Bases and provided cable guidance to the field.

In 1986, the Agency ended the HRE training program because of allegations of human rights abuses in Latin America.

From that point, the IG Report lays out the Directorate of Operations policy on interrogations developed in response to the HRE scandal (it is redacted in our copy), and suggests that’s where the narrative leaves off, with the CIA completely out of the business of torture since 1986.

Of course, that history didn’t quite end there. In 1991, we know, the Defense Department "discovered" that seven counterintelligence and interrogation manuals used for training in Latin American–including the one on Interrogation–still contained material that violated human rights and was derived from lesson plans developed in 1982 and used at the School of the Americas. After a nine-month investigation, DOD cited management problems for the inclusion of the inappropriate material in manuals, called for a damage assessment, and ordered that all the manuals be collected and destroyed. All the manuals, that is, except for one master copy:

For record purposes, the DoD General Counsel should retain one copy of each of the seven manuals along with a copy of this report. All other copies of the manuals and associated instructional materials, including computer disks, lesson plans, and "Project X" documents, should be destroyed.

The cover sheet showing the initialed approval of that recommendation by then-Defense Secretary Dick Cheney bears his then Special Assistant (and soon-to be DOD General Counsel) David Addington’s recommendation: "I concur."

While the CIA IG Report underplays the degree to which this knowledge remained at DOD between 1992 and 2001, that’s where we know it remained during the Clinton Administration.

(In related news, the Center for Constitutional Rights has made its very cool "Torture Trading Cards" available to order at their site. I’m waiting on a JPG of one of the cars themselves to do a full post on these, but I snagged a copy at Netroots Nation and they are very cool and very hysterical, so I recommend you get a set.)

21 replies
  1. WilliamOckham says:

    (In related news, the Center for Constitutional Rights has made its very cool “Torture Trading Cards” available to order at their site. I’m waiting on a JPG of one of the cars themselves to do a full post on these, but I snagged a copy at Netroots Nation and they are very cool and very hysterical, so I recommend you get a set.)

    I ordered the jumbo set for $20, but you can get them for free.

    • emptywheel says:

      If you can afford the jumbo set, I encourage you to do so–remember these are the guys who first pursued a habeas petition for a Gitmo detainee. They tell me lawyering isn’t cheap.

    • fatster says:

      They didn’t charge postage either, though I did contribute a tad extra for that. Cool lookin’ cards! Thnx to EW for alerting us.

      • emptywheel says:

        Yeah, it was pretty funny. The unveiled them at the panel I did with Nadler and everyone took one look and said, “you’re not charging for these?”

        So now they have a fee option which is good bc I think they’re worth the scratch if you have it.

  2. JimWhite says:

    The cards are wonderful, but I’m disappointed Cofer Black and Jose Rodriguez are not included in the “Spies” team and Stanley McChrystal is not included in the “Generals”. I went for the jumbo pack, too. I caught Vince Warren’s panel presentation last year at Netroots Nation–he was on fire!

  3. Jeff Kaye says:

    That’s a great catch, re Addington. I think this helps explain how the institutional knowledge of torture was alive in OVP’s office.

    I noted this story (minus the part about Addington) in May 2006, going into quite a bit of detail about what was in the manual. Here’s some of what I wrote then:

    The 1992 document deserves a brief look, however. In it, Werner Michel, an assistant to Cheney, is trying to clean up a situation in which U.S. Army Intelligence rules of interrogation made its way into manuals used to train Latin American military and intelligence personnel. It should be strongly noted that the worry is NOT over HOW the U.S. uses torture, but that that the fact it does will be discovered through its release in foreign manuals.

    From the 1992 memo, marked “Secret” [note, this is a PDF file]:

    An Army review, dated 21 February 1992, conducted at our request… concluded that five of the seven manuals contained language and statements in violation of legal, regulatory or policy prohibitions…. To illustrate, the manual Handling of Sources… refers to motivation by fear, payment of bounties for enemy dead, beatings, false imprisonment, executions and the use of truth serum…. It is incredible that the use of the lesson plans since 1982, and the manuals since 1987, evaded the established system of doctrinal controls.

    I see in the 92 memo something very important now: the ‘83 manual on “human exploitation” was written by Army military intelligence officers in Panama, and not by the CIA. (It is possible that these were CIA officers in military intelligence, and in any case, they cribbed heavily from the CIA’s KUBARK manual.)

    I will also quote from the 83 doc, from the original diary I wrote:

    Not all torture involves force. There are “non-coercive” methods, as well.

    There are a number of non-coercive techniques for inducing regression. All depend upon the interrogator’s control of the environment and, as always, a proper matching of method to source. Some interrogatees can be repressed by persistent manipulation of time, by retarding and advancing clocks and serving meals at odd times — ten minutes or ten hours after the last food was given. Day and night are jumbled.

    When all else fails, there is…

    The Theory of Coercion

    Coercive procedures are designed not only to exploit the resistant source’s internal conflicts and induce him to wrestle with himself but also to bring a superior outside force to bear upon the subject’s resistance. Non-coercive methods are not likely to succeed if their selection and use is not predicated upon an accurate psychological assessment of the source. In contrast, the same coercive method may succeed against persons who are very unlike each other. The changes of success rise steeply, nevertheless, if the coercive technique is matched to the source’s personality. Individuals react differently even to such seemingly non-discriminatory stimuli as drugs. Moreover, it is a waste of time and energy to apply strong pressures on a hit-or-miss basis if a tap on the psychological jugular will produce compliance.

    Looking back, that was a good piece I wrote, with lots of material. I recommend it to those interested. Or pursue the original gwu.edu links.

    If only I’d understood the Addington connection more back then…

    • prostratedragon says:

      Don’t reading stacks ever shrink?

      This passage from the Theory of Coercion is interesting:

      Non-coercive methods are not likely to succeed if their selection and use is not predicated upon an accurate psychological assessment of the source.

      • Jeff Kaye says:

        Yes, it has been a major aspect of CIA’s “scientific” form of psychological torture that the interrogation protocol be formed on the basis of a careful psych eval of the person’s personality, strengths, weaknesses, phobias, relationship style, etc.

        The psych eval of Abu Zubaydah still carries some of that format, but it was written months after his torture began, and was only written so they could get authorization for waterboarding, and also give OLC something to show that psychologists found waterboarding to be “safe” for a given prisoner, i.e., could be a usable “technique”. In other words, it was not the kind of eval mentioned in that old document.

        Watch FDL for an article I wrote on this that I hope comes out later today or tomorrow.

  4. Mary says:

    So if the name of the dead person from 1984 isn’t non-redacted yet, I’d guess that means no prosecution for that killing either.

    This would make year 25 – is that “classified” information of the name of the person killed in interrogation in 1984 going to be released this December?

    Or maybe since we can only look forward, Obama ought to put his pen to his policy and take written credit for overriding the 25 year default provisions of the prior Exec order.

  5. JimWhite says:

    Who took control of and looked after the safe during the Clinton years? Some of Cheney’s left-behinds, no doubt, but do we have names? [I still want to find his left-behinds with the bioweapons knowledge, too, because that will play a big role if we are ever to understand the anthrax attacks.]

  6. zhiv says:

    It’s amazing how you manage to be awesome and funny at the same time. The original safe, man-sized of course. Did the 4th branch claim this singular document and move it over to the new man-sized unit (complete with 4th branch seal). Or did they just start making copies for the torture team?

  7. fatster says:

    O/T, for the car people.

    California to lose its last major auto plant
    Toyota will shut down in March the joint venture it operated with General Motors in Fremont, eliminating 4,700 jobs. Sagging sales and GM’s bankruptcy are blamed.
    By Martin Zimmerman
    August 27, 2009 | 12:52 p.m.

    “Toyota Motor Corp. has decided to close its auto plant in the Bay Area city of Fremont early next year, eliminating about 4,700 jobs and bringing large-scale automobile production in California to an end.

    “Executives of New United Motor Manufacturing Inc., the joint venture Toyota set up with General Motors Corp. in 1984 to operate the sprawling assembly plant, told its workforce this morning that the plant would shut down in March, according to a union member who attended the meeting.”

    More

    • fatster says:

      More for the car people.

      Ford to add shifts at plants in Michigan, Missouri
      By KIMBERLY S. JOHNSON (AP) – 3 hours ago

      DETROIT — “Ford Motor Co. said Thursday that it would add a third shift to production plants in Michigan and Missouri to meet increased demand for its F-150 trucks and Escape crossover vehicles.

      “The moves offer specifics about Ford’s plan to increase production of cars and trucks in the fourth quarter by 33 percent over 2008 levels to a total of 570,000 vehicles.”

      More

      • SKIMPYPENGUIN says:

        Once inside a controlled facility…like the West Wing…you can move whatever classified material anywhere you want.

        You’re inside. Which means you belong there. Which means no one is going to bother you. You’re the VP’s lawyer…(and later his National Security Adviser).

        Addington committed treason against the US and needs to pay. Integrating portions of the School of America and KUBARK manuals into official US policy is distressing to me as a career employee.

      • Petrocelli says:

        Where the f*ck is Ahnuld … Cali is becoming the center of Hybrid & EV production and this plant needs to stay open.

        Isn’t this a Union plant ?

        • emptywheel says:

          It is a union plant. But there’s not much Arnold can do. There’s almost no way CA can match ONT’s costs (bc of healthcare), and the ONT plant has capacity.

          I’m sure you don’t want them to close the ONT plant unstead, do you?

        • Petrocelli says:

          I don’t see it as either or, I’d like to see them keep the NUMMI open and bring in a new vehicle or two.

          I think Toyota would love a deal, to gain some P.R. capital in America.

  8. greenbird4751 says:

    before i read, i gotta post: this is my stolen sig on dkos, for which, again, i seek permission to use…sachem, you delight you…

    “The Addington perpwalk is the trailhead for accountability in this wound on our national psyche.–Sachem”

Comments are closed.