Book Reviews

A Declassified Case Against Torture

Retired FBI agent Ali Soufan argues that the agency's thirst for torture made it harder to protect Americans.

|

The Black Banners (Declassified): How Torture Derailed the War on Terror After 9/11, by Ali Soufan, W.W. Norton & Co., 640 pages, $17.95

The terrorist has been captured, and the clock is ticking. FBI agents know they need to use humane interrogation methods to get the information that could stop a deadly attack. But clueless politicians in Washington want to use torture, wasting precious minutes and putting the mission at risk.

It sounds like a parody of a post-9/11 spy thriller. But it's a scenario that keeps recurring in Ali Soufan's autobiography, The Black Banners (Declassified). Soufan, a retired FBI agent who was pursuing Al Qaeda long before it was a household name, argues that secrecy and the thirst for torture made it harder to protect Americans. We would have been better served, he shows, if Washington had treated terrorism as a law enforcement problem, not an exception to the law.

Much of Soufan's story has already been told, both in the heavily censored 2011 edition of his book and in the official 9/11 Commission Report. In the months before September 11, 2001, the CIA failed to give the FBI crucial information that could have stopped the attackers and saved thousands of American lives. In the years that followed, the FBI-CIA rivalry continued to hinder counterterrorism efforts.

The new edition of The Black Banners—finally fully declassified after a lengthy legal battle—paints an even more disturbing picture. FBI agents had been waging an effective fight against Al Qaeda using ordinary interrogation tactics. But after 9/11, the Bush administration unleashed torture methods that were self-sabotaging as well as immoral.

Soufan had been tracking Al Qaeda since the 1990s, building an encyclopedic knowledge of Osama bin Laden's group. Sometimes he used this knowledge to catch suspects in a lie, flustering them and forcing them to tell the truth. Other times he got suspects to warm up to him with small talk and acts of kindness. Many terrorists knew they would have been viciously tortured by their home countries' security services; they had no idea what to make of the fearsome FBI sending a likeable Arab Muslim to chat with them over tea.

"Acting in a nonthreatening way isn't what the terrorist expects from a U.S. interrogator. This adds to the detainee's confusion and makes him more likely to cooperate," Soufan writes. "Because the interrogator is the one person speaking to and listening to the detainee, a relationship is built—and the detainee doesn't want to jeopardize it."

Soufan first caught an inkling of the 9/11 plot in 2000, while serving as lead investigator into the bombing of the USS Cole in Yemen. FBI agents on the ground discovered that Al Qaeda was transferring money to operatives abroad for something, and he wanted to find out what. But the CIA refused to share intelligence that, combined with the FBI's leads, could have led to the 9/11 hijackers.

Despite its failure to stop the attacks, the CIA grew more powerful after 9/11. The United States invaded Afghanistan, where Al Qaeda was based, and captured scores of militants. These captives were treated neither as criminal suspects nor as prisoners of war but as "enemy combatants," a legal term invented to imply that they had no rights. Some were held at Naval Station Guantanamo Bay, while the CIA disappeared others to secret black sites.

The climax of Soufan's story occurred at one such black site and nearly led him to arrest CIA officers on the spot. Pakistani forces had captured Zayn al-Abidin "Abu Zubaydah" Muhammad Hussein, a senior official from a militant training camp in Afghanistan, and handed him to the Americans in March 2002. Soufan knew of Abu Zubaydah from a previous investigation, and he was rushed to a secret base to help interrogate the prisoner.

CIA censors selectively redacted much of what happened next from the 2011 edition of Soufan's memoir. What remained could give readers the impression that torture helped soften up Abu Zubaydah. Only the 2020 edition tells the full, damning story.

FBI agents spent 10 long days interrogating Abu Zubaydah as medical personnel fought to keep the badly wounded militant alive. He cooperated quickly, even naming Khalid Sheikh Mohammed as the mastermind of the 9/11 attacks. The FBI also learned that Abu Zubaydah had trained and assisted many high-level members of Al Qaeda but was not a formal member of the group.

The Bush administration, which believed (and told the public) that it had captured Al Qaeda's third-in-command, insisted that Abu Zubaydah had simply bamboozled the FBI. So the CIA turned to former Air Force trainer and psychological consultant James Elmer Mitchell. (Although he is named only by a pseudonym in Soufan's book, Mitchell has written his own account of these events.)

Mitchell's solution, as Soufan puts it, was to "make Abu Zubaydah see his interrogator as a god who controls his suffering." In other words, torture.

Mitchell had never interrogated a terrorist. In fact, he had never interrogated anyone at all. His methods were not just cruel but bizarre. Abu Zubaydah was left naked and sleep-deprived as CIA officers blasted loud music into his cell. An interrogator playing the role of God would say "Tell me what you know?" only to leave the room every time Abu Zubaydah responded, "What do you want to know?" At one point, the CIA left a crayon in Abu Zubaydah cell, hoping he would spontaneously write down valuable information. Even other CIA officers on the ground were uncomfortable with these techniques. The pressure to torture came from the highest levels of the Bush administration.

Higher-ups eventually noticed that the information had stopped coming and gave Soufan permission to try his own methods. The torture stopped, and Abu Zubaydah began providing useful information again, leading to the arrest of wannabe bomber Jose Padilla.

Even this intelligence was distorted for political ends. Padilla had wanted to set off a radioactive "dirty bomb," and the Bush administration publicly took credit for stopping an "unfolding terrorist plot" to irradiate an American city. Soufan emphasizes that Padilla was indeed a "committed terrorist" with malicious intent, but he notes that he was "a brain transplant away" from actually building a radiation weapon. The Bush administration's statements "unnecessarily instilled fear in the American people," Soufan writes, and "made us look foolish in the eyes of al-Qaeda."

The CIA had another turn at Abu Zubaydah, and then the FBI got to interrogate him again. The cycle repeated a third time. Finally, the CIA brought in a coffin to terrify Abu Zubaydah with a mock burial. That was the last straw. When Soufan threatened to start making arrests, then–FBI Director Robert Mueller ordered his agents out of the black site.

Abu Zubaydah was extensively tortured after that. His mental state deteriorated, and he lost an eye. The information he provided under torture did not stop a single terrorist plot, but the Bush administration used some of it to justify the invasion of Iraq. In 2005, CIA officers destroyed videotapes of Abu Zubaydah's interrogation in order to cover their tracks. The following year, Abu Zubaydah was transferred to Guantanamo Bay, where he told a U.S. military tribunal that he had made false statements just to make the pain stop.

Mitchell was paid millions for his services. Gina Haspel, one of the officers who destroyed evidence of Abu Zubaydah's torture, served as CIA director from 2018 to early 2021. Abu Zubaydah, who has not been charged with a single crime, is still imprisoned in Cuba.

Soufan managed to build a rapport with several detainees at Guantanamo Bay without torture. One prisoner—who knew bin Laden's wife, it turns out—even promised to provide more information if the FBI allowed him to call his family. Soufan agreed, but the U.S. military officers at Guantanamo Bay refused. Those officials "wouldn't let a detainee use a phone for a minute, which would have led to bin Laden," Soufan writes, "but they didn't mind disregarding the U.S. Constitution" with their harsh treatment of prisoners.

In September 2002, Pakistani forces handed militants Ramzi bin al-Shibh and Hassan bin Attash to the CIA. (Bin Attash is named only by a pseudonym in the book.) Soufan was given 45 minutes to interrogate them, against the wishes of CIA headquarters. Bin Attash knew that Soufan had previously treated suspects with kindness. Deciding to cooperate, he spilled the beans on Al Qaeda's plot to blow up an oil tanker in Yemen.

The CIA refused to believe that bin Attash was telling the truth and transferred him to an unnamed country to be tortured. Al Qaeda blew up the MV Limburg off the coast of Yemen the next month, just as bin Attash had warned. The attack killed one, wounded 12, and caused an oil spill.

Soufan left the FBI in 2005. He testified against torture to the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2009 and remains an outspoken critic of the excesses of the war on terror. And he has something to say to his detractors: "If my account was not true, they would not have tried to censor it."

NEXT: Joy Reid Said Vaccinated People Who Refuse To Wear Masks Are 'Irrational.' Fauci Didn't Correct Her.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

      1. Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple work from home. I have df df received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
        on this page…..VISIT HERE

    1. [ PART TIME JOB FOR USA ] Making money online more than 15$ just by doing simple works from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info
      on this page…. Visit Here

  1. The whole lot of them can rot = Guantanamo Bay prisoners

    1. I’ve read some of your comments here and I’m pretty sure you fit the bill of a domestic terrorist. I can only assume they’ll be locking your ass up in Guantanamo Bay soon enough, maybe in the cell right next to me. And rightfully so, because we all trust the CIA and the FBI to not be lying sacks of shit that all should be shot for treason.

    2. Did you even bother to read this article, or is there some nuance that I missed? ‘letting them rot’ is not going to make the US any safer.

  2. In the months before September 11, 2001, the CIA failed to give the FBI crucial information that could have stopped the attackers and saved thousands of American lives.

    At least partially because they weren’t allowed to. The FBI is a domestic law-enforcement agency investigating largely American citizens who have Constitutional rights, the CIA is a foreign intelligence service where the laws and the Constitution don’t apply. They are in all ways a rogue agency operating beyond all laws and all oversight. Allowing the FBI to conduct itself as if it were the CIA is a death sentence for civil rights.

    And that’s exactly what has happened post 9/11. The War on Terror effectively means the Constitution has been suspended if the FBI claims you’re a terrorist – and we all know who the terrorists are now.

    1. “…the CIA is a foreign intelligence service where the laws and the Constitution don’t apply.”

      The laws and Constitution of the United States apply to everyone that swears an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. The laws of the United States include treaties that have been ratified by a 2/3 vote of the Senate. It is correct to say that the United States cannot impose its laws on those outside of its jurisdiction, but there are circumstances where a civilian U.S. citizen can still be held legally accountable in the U.S. for acts they make outside of U.S. territory. For those that work for the U.S. government, whether as civilian contractors, federal employees, military personnel, or other officers of the United States, they are just as bound to the laws and Constitution of the United States as they are when they are on U.S. soil.

      I think that you are saying that you don’t believe or at least don’t like how the CIA and other foreign intelligence agencies of the U.S. act as if they are above the law. But in order to rein in this kind of “rogue agency” behavior, we need to be clear to everyone that the law and Constitution aren’t applicable to Americans only on U.S. soil and only when interacting with other Americans. We are a party to treaties that forbid torture. Any U.S. operative that tortured anyone was guilty of a crime, no matter where it happened. Those treaties also forbid us from allowing other governments to commit acts of torture with our knowledge. “Extraordinary rendition” was just as much a crime as if we did the torture ourselves. And despite claims to the contrary, there are no “enemy combatants” that fall outside the limits imposed by the Geneva Conventions. Non-uniformed combatants that aren’t part of the regular army of a state actor may not get some of the same privileges and rights as a uniformed soldier with rank and insignia, but they still have basic human rights against being tortured or being confined indefinitely with no access to legal challenge of their detention.

      We really failed miserably to live up to our ideals and written law after 9/11. That the “rule of law” and “law and order” party was in the lead on this this just makes things worse. The damage to our moral authority continues to bite us in the ass today.

    2. to rephrase, JasonT20’s comment succinctly, the Constitution always applies to all actions of US governmental personnel, regardless of where they are.

  3. “The terrorist has been captured, and the clock is ticking. FBI agents know they need to use humane interrogation methods to get the information that could stop a deadly attack.” “But clueless politicians in Washington want to use torture, wasting precious minutes and putting the mission at risk”.

    Ahh, old “infallible, friendly Ali” conveneintly left out a very important fact. The guys that were doing ALL the torture were fellow Arabs and Muslims. They were the guys that would insist that “being nice” would get you nowhere. The FBI and CIA people were following the lead and advice of Muslims and Arabs who “knew the culture” and insisted that torture was the only way to get critical information.
    “Ali the friendly” is just one more lying Muslim terrorist. The interrogated terrorist was going to disappear down the black hole anyways. There was no need to be nice. Ali is just playing the victim. Typical.

  4. Wait you mean Saint Obama and Uncle Joe still haven’t closed the prison at Guantanamo Bay Cuba? That Her Highness Clinton and always a bridesmaid Susan Rice still haven’t publicly stated they think it should be closed?

    I laugh in the face of people who still insist the Obama admin was scandal free and transparent.

  5. Too bad Reason didn’t remember that FBI is a corrupt group of corner-cutting, civil rights violating, Machiavellian bastards back when their writers were attacking the only president of the past fifty years to try and do something to rein those bastards in.

  6. Sounds like what many hardcore libertarians have been preaching for years. Nice to have a bit more inside info to confirm the hypothesis. Maybe not the whole story, but at least it’s a bit of hard data.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.