Emails between Thomas J. Harrington, Frankie Battle, Marion Bowman and Others re: Instructions to FBI Personnel Conducting Interrogations at Guantanamo Bay

This email is to ensure that all FBI personnel touring through Guantanamo Bay and who participate in interrogations of detainees adhere to the Bureaus policies on the treatment of suspects and their own personal conduct when conducting interrogations. There was concern expressed as to whether FBI personnel were told in writing not to deviate from FBI policies. The email mentions different techniques used by FBI and DoD. The email states "Our [FBI] formal guidance has always I personnel conduct themselves in interviews in the manner that they would in the field" and "[we are] of the opinion results obtained from these [enhanced] interrogations were suspect at best. FBI has been successful for many years obtaining confessions via non-confrontational interviewing techniques".

Doc_type: 
Email
Doc_date: 
Monday, May 10, 2004
Doc_rel_date: 
Wednesday, March 2, 2005
Doc_text: 

.41=111.1=1¦=1111l
Page 1 of 3
Message
in*

III(IR) (FBI)
141 -3

b7C -1
From: I Viv13 ) (FBI)

Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 1228 PM
I
To HARRINGTON, T J. (13103) (FBI
Cc: . BATTLE. bi3 (Div13) (FBI) I47c CUMMINGS. ARTHUR U. (13Iv13)
I

Subject: instructions b GTMO interrogators.
PeldAWORC200011
31514aAfil-C99101.
TJ,
.
from Bureau policy). We did advisasach supervisor that went to GTMO to stay In One with Bureau policy and not. deviate from that (as well as made them aware of some of the issues regarding 04:0 techniques). I went to GPAO with Andy Arena early on and we discussed the apctivenep (or lad there of) of the Dori techniques with
the SSA. We (BALI and ITOS1) had also mel with Generars Dunlevey • Miler eirdaIntrig our position (Law Enforcement techniques) vs. DoD. Both agreed the Bureau has theiramy of dong business and DoD has their marching orders from the Sec Def, Although the two techniques differed drastically, both Generati believed they had a job to accomplish. It was our mission to gather critical intelligence and evidence (that could be use in a Dot} court of law) in furtherance of FBI cases. In my weekly meetings with DOJ we often discussed DoD
. techniques and how they were not effective or producing Intel that was reliable. Bruce Swailz (SES), Dave Nahmias (SES), Laura Parsley (now SES, GS1S at the time) and Nide Fisher (SES Appointee) all from DOJ ) Criminal Division attended meetings with, FBI. We all agreed DoD tactics were going to be an issue in the military , commission cases. I know Mr. Swariz.hroeght this to the attention of DoD OGC.
I will have to db same digging into old tiles (to see if we speciftcany told our personnel, in writing; to not deviate
Opp Anneifie Pram&wacjOnce the Bureau provide DoD with the findingsr771and other b4 -1,7,4 to! let al) y wanted to pursue expeditious* their methods to get more out of him' We lac -1,$,Ii were given a so called deadline to use our traditional methods. Once our Moine (that DoD Untoace) was
up, DoD took the reigns. We stepped out of the picture and Do n agains FBI did not b7/1-1 - participate at the direction of myself, Andy Arena, and BAU Li ZWe would receive IRs on ill resu s ) air -1..of the process.
•-d by Do. re
I went to GTMO on one occasion to cess the informationv011iinifro'tht;ftsph;cii....D
We (DoD 3 Star Geoff Miller. Fel, CI )hteri VTC with the'Pentagon Detainee Policy Committee During this VTC I voiced concerns that the in produced was nothing more than what FBI got using
blI
WI -2.3,41 lianageatlitraliffinliagiCing the bail of the detainee in and out of the US compared to sed on dassifted Into from the Penttbomb investigation). LL Cot 177c ^7.3,4 providing the DoD portion of the brie il was present at the en side of
the VTC, After allowing DoD (Lt. Co to produce oath !finny voiced my opinion concerning the
ton -1
information. The conversations were somewhat heated. red with me. DoD finally admitted the
1511 -1 information was the same into the Bureau obtained. It did not prevent them from continuing the "DoD methods*. DO! was with me at GTMO (Dave Nahmlas) during that time.
Bottom line is FBI personnel have not been involved in any methods of interrogation that deviate from our policy. The specific guidance we have given has always been no Miranda, otherwise, follow FBI/DOJ policy just as you would in your field office. Use common sense. Utilize our methods that are proven (Reed school. etc).

DOD 000949

4
Page 2 of 3
From: HARRINGTON, T 3. (01v13) (FBI)
, 2004 9:21 API
To: (Div13) (FBI)
Subject: RE: pts confirm

SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED
NON-RECORD _

vnmel Arei vo. Ayr! nue intri writinn in EC, memo.
We Have this information, now we are trying to go that we were
note or briefing paper to our personnel our position
pursuing our traditional methods of building trust ani a ns rp w su 1eds.

Referral/Direct
From: Div13) (FBI)
b6ISent nay, May , 10:52 AM
To: HARRINGTON, T J. (Div13) (FBI)

b7C -1I
kDivl3) (FBI); BATTLE, FRANKIE (Div13) (FBI); BOWMAN, MARION E.
CC:1I
(Div09) (FBI)
Subject: RE: pis confirm

SENSITIVE BUT UNCOSSIFIED
LION-RECD_RD

BAU at the request of the then (GTMO Task Force, ITOS1) wrote an EC (quite long) explaining the I
1
Bureau way of Interrogation vs. DoDs methodology. Our formal guidance has always personnel conduct themselves in interviews in the manner that they would in the field.
b6 -2
fezral/Direct 1 falong with FBI advised that the LEA (Law Enforcement • enctes a
b7c -2-
land were of the opinion results
. ....„......_ GTMO were not in the practice of the us!ngi obtained horn these interrogations were suspect at best. BAU explained to DoD. FBI has been successful for many years obtaining confessions via non-confrontational interviewing techniques.

We spoke to FBI OGC with out concerns. I also brought these matters to the attention of DOJ during detainee meetings with Laura Parsky and Dave Nahmias. DOJ express their concerns to
DoD OCC.
Inas a copy of all the information regarding me. BAU LHM. ,I believe she has provided that to
rI
156 -2I•
b7C -1ITJ Harrington.
I may have more specific information in my desk at HO. I will search what I have when t return
(5117).
--Original Message—
From: HARRINGTON, T 3. (Div13) (FBI)
Sent: Monday, May 10, 2004 4:33 AM

11,2,LBAMFLv1FRANICIE (01v13) (F111);1 I(Div13) (FB1)J
sub_ 1 IDIv13) (FBI)
b7C -1
I.Ipa: /: pts confirm
SE STT BUT UNCLASSIFIED NON-RECORD
Please review our control fires, did we produce anything on paper???
Message----From: Caproni, Valerie E. (D1v09) (FBI) Serf Sunday. May 09, 2004 2:31 PM
56 -1
) To I(Div09) (FBI); HARRINGTON, T 3. (DN13) (FBI) tin -1
DETAINEES-2710 9/26/2004

DOD 000950

Page 3 of 3
MrIgnge

b15 -1 (Div13) (FBri kDivi3) {FBI) Subject pls confirm
D7C -1
$ENSiTIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED NON-REDSRD
I think I've heard this several times, but let me ask one more time:
Has there been any written guidance given lo FBI agents in either GTMO or Iraq about dear bk of the Interrogation techniques being used by DOD or DH
SENSITIVE ED
CLASSIFIED
DERIVED FROM: D4ffilICIaSSECitiOn§pide_g44,dsted jfgla_Egrelign_Daunklintakteneg _Investigations DE_DIAWFICATION EXEMPTION SECRETi/ORCONAIOnitN
DETAINEES-2711

76.ECRET:
9126/2004
DOD 000951

Doc_nid: 
3221
Doc_type_num: 
67