Western Whites DON'T UNDERSTAND ANYTHING about their own countries and race.
Western Govts DON'T FOLLOW "ANY RULES". They merely BRAINWASH YOU 24x7
that Western Countries are superior, civilized, democratic, angelic etc
BUT IN REALITY they do EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE.
Western Govts PERPETRATE the SAME DECEPTION on other countries, not just
on western public.
CIA "TORTURES" people just like DICTATORS, but DECEIVE the public by
calling them "Enhanced Interrogation Techniques".
Whites DON'T UNDERSTAND their OWN "INFINITE DECEPTION and MANIPULATION".
FBI Agents Became CIA Agents During Crucial Black-Site Period, 9/11
By John Ryan | November 19, 2021 |
Guantanamo Naval Base, Cuba – The latest pretrial session in the Sept.
11 case ended much where it began as defense teams continued their quest
for more information and witnesses related to the FBI’s role at CIA
black sites that subjected the five defendants to abusive conditions
between 2002 and 2006.
In doing so, however, lawyers revealed the details of a previously
unknown level of integration between the agencies – that at least nine
FBI agents actually became CIA agents for an undisclosed period of time
while the defendants were held at the secret locations.
“The FBI agents stopped being FBI agents and became CIA agents
temporarily,” James Connell, the lead lawyer for one of the five
defendants, Ammar al Baluchi, said Thursday.
Connell told the judge, Air Force Col. Matthew McCall, that the FBI
agents’ switch to the CIA might have been a tactic of “deniability” or
“strategic ambiguity” to obscure the FBI’s involvement in the black-site
program. The FBI also later conducted the interrogations on Guantanamo
Bay that the government hopes to use at trial.
Prosecutor Clay Trivett downplayed the significance of the change in
affiliation of the nine agents. He said the government had no need for
deniability because the Bush administration made interagency cooperation
a public priority after the 9/11 attacks. Trivett said the memorandum of
understanding between the CIA and FBI over the detailing of the nine
agents to the CIA was intended to keep information “in correct channels”
for the purposes of “information security.”
“This is not some big bombshell,” Trivett said.
The revelation came on the last day of open court of a three-week
session. It was yet another twist in a serpentine series of discovery
disputes underpinned with years of history and resentment. Over the
contentious hearing, prosecutors and defense lawyers agreed on little
other than the fact that McCall – presiding over his second session of a
case that dates to May 2012 – is in an unenviable position.
As he did in his first session, in September, McCall allowed – and often
encouraged – lawyers on both sides to provide expansive background and
context to their oral arguments so he could become educated on the turns
of the unlikely path that brought the case to his doorstep 20 years
after the 9/11 attacks without a trial date on the calendar.
Most critically at this phase, defense teams are litigating to suppress
the incriminating statements their clients made to FBI agents on
Guantanamo Bay in early 2007, after their transfer from the black sites.
Lawyers contend that the early and ongoing coordination between the CIA
and FBI shows that those statements were the fruits of torture.
Prosecutors contend that the FBI agents who elicited confessions from
the defendants in 2007 relied on the FBI’s post-9/11 investigative work
– and not on information from the black site interrogations.
Earlier, McCall decided against resuming witness testimony during this
session for the suppression dispute. Instead, he dedicated most of this
three-week session to a number of discovery motions over the CIA’s
rendition program and the FBI’s role in it. He said he would bring
“clarity” to these disputes as the return of FBI witnesses looms for
Thursday’s revelation came as part the overlapping motions seeking more
information about CIA-FBI collaboration both at the black sites and at
Guantanamo Bay. Defense lawyers have by and large stopped referring to
the CIA’s rendition program as a CIA program, favoring instead the
portrayal of a government-wide system of extracting statements from
detainees in a variety of settings, the latest being on Guantanamo Bay
in 2007 as the government hoped to fashion valid statements for a
On Thursday morning, a military lawyer for another of the defendants,
Walid bin Attash, asked McCall to order the government to produce the
names of FBI witnesses who were at CIA black sites in the 30-day periods
both before and after bin Attash’s presence at the sites. Air Force Maj.
Jay Peer said his team initially asked for the names of agents who were
“co-located” at the sites with bin Attash, then broadened its “temporal”
request after prosecutors said that no agents were at the sites “at the
same time” as their client.
Peer said the government’s refusal to provide the names “speaks volumes”
and that his team is entitled to investigate how FBI agents helped
prepare CIA interrogators for interviews, review the intelligence
learned and later plan for future sessions.
Echoing his colleagues from prior days, Peer noted that the defense
teams did not begin to receive any discovery on the FBI’s role at CIA
black sites until mid-2018.
“Many years after the arraignment in this case,” Peer said on a video
feed from the commissions' remote hearing room in Virginia.
Defense teams learned about the nine FBI agents switching their
affiliation to the CIA as part of the earlier tranches of discovery on
FBI-CIA coordination. However, it was only recently declassified for
Following Peer, Connell used the unusual CIA-FBI arrangement to alert
McCall that he should be wary of the government’s use of “distortions”
of the rendition program when assessing the pending discovery disputes.
“All may not be as it seems,” Connell said.
Trivett told McCall that the nine FBI-turned-CIA agents participated in
debriefing sessions at black sites during which “enhanced interrogation
techniques” were not employed. Of the nine agents, Trivett told McCall
that the government has provided the defense teams with the names of the
five who either interviewed the defendants or assisted in the
preparation of the sessions at Guantanamo.
He said that the government began providing discovery on CIA-FBI
coordination relatively late in the litigation because prosecutors had
not been aware of the extent of the FBI’s participation in the CIA
program. Just minutes earlier, however, Connell pointed McCall to a
document the defense team received in 2015 about the black sites in
which the government redacted information that showed the involvement of
the FBI. Connell said that someone from the government side made an
“affirmative” decision to hide the FBI’s role from the defense.
McCall has more on his plate than CIA-FBI collaboration. The defense
teams and prosecutors have another series of discovery disputes over the
issue of “hostilities.” Because the military commissions system
established during the Bush administration and amended under Barack
Obama is meant to prosecute war crimes, the government has to prove at
trial as an element of the offenses that the United States was in an
armed conflict with al Qaeda at the time of the 9/11 attacks.
Defense lawyers are seeking information about how the Clinton and Bush
administrations dealt with the al Qaeda threat prior to Sept. 11, 2001,
as part an effort to show that the response was more consistent with
law-enforcement than actual war. The prosecution contends it has
complied with its discovery obligations on the hostilities evidence.
Oral arguments on these disputes took place at the tail end of the
second week and the start of the third week during this session.
Also this week, defense lawyers queued up for McCall the question of the
constitution’s applicability to the Guantanamo Bay proceedings. Lawyers
want their clients present for closed sessions of the suppression
witnesses in which classified information is discussed on the grounds
that their absence violates due process and confrontation clause
protections in the 5th, 6th and 8th amendments. Prosecutors contend that
the classified sessions are reserved for those with appropriate security
clearances and that the defendants can attend the “vast majority” of the
proceedings in open hearings.
Thursday’s oral arguments concluded with another member of Connell’s
team, Alka Pradhan, asking McCall to order the government to preserve
the Camp 7 portion of the detention facility where the five defendants
and other former CIA prisoners were held prior to their transfer earlier
this year to another area, Camp 5. Pradhan explained in significant
detail late Thursday how Camp 7 fell apart and was rife with sewage issues.
Before recessing, McCall asked for input on how the two-week session
scheduled to start Jan. 10 should unfold. It was not immediately clear
whether the suppression hearings would resume with testimony of one or
more FBI personnel who participated in the 9/11 investigation, including
agents who interrogated the defendants on Guantanamo Bay.
About the author: John Ryan (jo...@lawdragon.com
) is a co-founder and the
Editor-in-Chief of Lawdragon Inc., where he oversees all web and
magazine content and provides regular coverage of the military
commissions at Guantanamo Bay. When he’s not at GTMO, John is based in
Brooklyn. He has covered complex legal issues for 20 years and has won
multiple awards for his journalism, including a New York Press Club
Award in Journalism for his coverage of the Sept. 11 case. View our