Theses emails are between DIS Officials discussing developing interrogation policies and guidelines. One of the authors states that the interrogation mission is codified under the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Combat Command doctrine. However, questionable conduct in the past by certain interrogators and murky rules of the road led to the need for an interrogation policy to be developed. One of the authors states "Frankly, if never occurred to me that anyone except DIA would prepare and issue such a policy. We issue policies on everything else we do, why not interrogation?"
APR-06-2005 22:14 US ATTORNEYS OFFICE 212 P.19/33
Page 1 of 8
From
Sent: Tuesda December 09, 2003 it:55 AM
(IPP)
To
Cc
Sub ea: nterroganan Policy
CLASS1FlCATIONA6OREF
CAVEATS relefefirt
TERMS: NONE
bringing
(b)(3) =— Please see below from." In speaking withnjust now. he recommends bringing
into the fray. He has the institutional knowledge and expertise to best convey ma argument
(1:1 (2)
you are not missing anything. It is the lawyers who are Missing the point.
(b)(3) ded in the
itnceirli
interrogation mission is codified under JCS and combatant command doctrine, andnfounding documents. In keeping with this mission,11111has routinely identified and deployed interrogaters.to-assist .ITEs and.Cornbatant.Commanders_with interrogations, With.theincreased_ (b)(1) demand for jute a-WI I.
as (b)(3) interrogators. murlcules of the road, OSP interest in
( 2)(2)
on questionable conduct in the past by
plays at GTMO. I directed a
OTMO rules, significantly different les, and the central role
11 i terrogution policy be develope am pretty WIC the TM was aware of this,
lep6 .iv t we
tilel
J
attended several OSD legal meetings on inlet-rogation policy. I believe the aim y beton (9 the Combatant Commanders and fall under their rules is shortsighted. It seems LO me that these individuals need to be e to operate off of a ul y c • nate an vet • interrogation policy. We have the experience and expertise to prepare such a document. and it definitely should be a joint document. If the lawyers want it to he II Joint Staff document, then I would argue the way to go is for DIA to coordinate and dispatch The
its policy, and then let the Joint Staff codify it in their doctrine. as we did with Joint Staff does not have the expertise to prepare what you guys pulled together. ilMl
but I know he was aware of its development and of the meetings
discussing this wit rankly, if never occurred to mc that anyone except =DIA would
prepare and issue such a policy. We issue policies on e‘er•thing else we do--m by not interrogation?
0013)
----Or' ii 'i iiia
03x3) sent: T December 09, 2003 9:29 AM
To/
Subject: FW: Interrogation Poky
Sensitivity: Private
(3)(3) fil.-IrrAnnei IIMINErm IfIrt trintINTI; R - 01 NTI:R P-1 -1 •rfly 7117/20(1.1
DODDIA 000193
P.20/33
APR-06-2005 22:15.US ATTORNEYS OFFICE 212.
03X2) HEADQUARTERS INDEX.
1.
PHONE LISTA.UNKNOWN AUTHOR, UNDATEDASCAST4iNer-eliN-
2.
PHONE UST, UNKNOWN AUTHOR. UNDATED,
3.
EMAIL LIST OF PERSONNEL INVOLVED IN CONSOLIDATED (bX6)
•
Ma) 4. LISTING OF INTERROGATION PERsoNNELOIDG1 JUNE 2003. AUTHOR
.ftetemerew
5, LIST OF DEPLOYED PERSONNEL -MO DATED 15 JULY 2004, AUTHOR,
11111111/11111/66MERNOFew*
6. LIST OF DEPLOYED PERSONNEL _mg DATED 16 JULY 2004, AUTHOR. 111.1.6GREN4,14ePefiN-
HEADQUARTERS.. PERSONNEL INVOLVED IN TASKER SEARCH:
DODDIA 000194
P.21/33
APR-06-2005 22:15.US ATTORNEYS OFFICE 212.
-sc-eiter*NeFERNAttget 20-SUPPORT TO U.S. CENTRALaxe) I. 29 OCT 02:COMAND OPLAN 100346494Ft -2. 15 NOV OZ: AUTHORIZATION FORME OFFICERS TO PARTICIPATE IN CUSTODIAL INTERVIEWS 46/41414-
(bX1 ) tbX2)
12 JUL 04: CONTACT il.LIAISON CONTACT WITH (14(1) (b)(2)
ASEC-RE44110*FERNIVE109. We-. -
DODDIA 000195