Blogs and Stories
The Bush Administration Homicides
Karel Prinsloo / AP Photo
For five years as a researcher for Human Rights Watch and reporter, John Sifton helped investigate homicides resulting from the Bush administration's torture policy. His findings include:
• An estimated 100 detainees have died during interrogations, some who were clearly tortured to death.
• The Bush Justice Department failed to investigate and prosecute alleged murders even when the CIA inspector general referred a case.
• Sifton’s request for specific information on cases was rebuffed by the Bush Justice Department, though it was “familiar with the cases.”
• Attorney General Eric Holder must now decide whether to investigate and prosecute homicides, not just cases of torture.
A simple fact is being overlooked in the Bush-era torture scandal: the number of cases in which detainees have been tortured to death. Abuse did not only involve the high-profile cases of smashing detainees into plywood barriers (“walling”), confinement in coffin-like boxes with insects, sleep deprivation, cold, and waterboarding. To date approximately 100 detainees, including CIA-held detainees, have died during U.S. interrogations, and some are known to have been tortured to death.
The bottom line is that many detainee homicides in Iraq and Afghanistan were the direct result of approval and orders from the highest levels of government, and that high officials in the government are accomplices.
A review of homicide cases, however, shows that few detainee deaths have been properly investigated. Many were not investigated at all. And no official investigation has looked into the connection between detainee deaths and the interrogation policies promulgated by the Bush administration.
Yet an important report by the Senate Armed Services Committee, declassified in April 2009, explains in clear terms how Bush-era interrogation techniques, including torture, once authorized for CIA high-value detainees, were promulgated to Guantánamo, Iraq, and Afghanistan, where (as reporter Jason Leopold recently noted at The Public Record) the policies have led to homicides.
The killings, at least some of them, have hardly been kept secret. As early as May-June 2003, The New York Times and Washington Post reported on deaths of detainees in Afghanistan. Two detainees at Bagram air base died after extensive beatings by U.S. troops in December 2002—a case reported by The New York Times and that was also the subject of the Oscar-winning documentary Taxi to the Dark Side. Another death involved a man beaten to death by a CIA contractor at a base in Asadabad, in eastern Afghanistan, in June 2003.
In September 2004, the Crimes of War Project, working with investigative journalist Craig Pyes, uncovered a torture murder in Gardez, Afghanistan, in March 2003. Jamal Naseer, a soldier in the Afghan Army, died after he and seven other soldiers were mistakenly arrested. Those arrested with Naseer later said that during interrogations U.S. personnel punched and kicked them, hung them upside down, and hit them with sticks or cables. Some said they were doused with cold water and forced to lie in the snow. Nasser collapsed about two weeks after the arrest, complaining of stomach pain, probably an internal hemorrhage.
In May 2005, as a researcher for Human Rights Watch, I reported on several other cases of torture homicides, including a case in which the military claimed a detainee had died because he was “bitten by a snake.”
To the best of my knowledge, the first death of a U.S. detainee in custody occurred in August 2002—an Afghan detainee named Mohammad Sayari killed by four U.S. military personnel. I first learned about the Sayari case in 2005, reading through a Department of Defense document obtained via a Freedom of Information Act case by the American Civil Liberties Union. The document contained a short description of the incident: A captain and three sergeants “murdered Mr. [Sayari] after detaining him for following their movements in Afghanistan.” The section of the document detailing the result of the investigation was redacted.
More than three years after the murder, human-rights groups and I pressed the military for an explanation. The Army revealed that commanders had declined to prosecute any of the four men implicated in the case, although one of the four soldiers received an “administrative reprimand.” In 2006, additional documents obtained by the ACLU disclosed that the Army investigation had found probable cause to recommend charges of murder and conspiracy against the four Special Forces soldiers. According the investigation, the four soldiers had captured the detainee, a civilian noncombatant, and shot him, presumably after interrogating him. (Investigators also recommended dereliction-of-duty charges against three of the men and a charge of obstruction of justice against the highest-ranking, a captain, who admitted to destroying evidence of the crime.) Inexplicably, without a court martial, the case was closed. The captain received a letter of reprimand for “destroying evidence.”
In February 2006, a review by Human Rights First determined that almost 100 detainees died in U.S. custody in Afghanistan and Iraq facilities as of 2005, and that almost half of the cases were clearly homicides. Several cases discussed in the report were clear cases of torture homicides.
To take one example, in December 2003, a 44-year-old Iraqi man named Abu Malik Kenami died in a U.S. detention facility in Mosul, Iraq. As reported by Human Rights First, U.S. military personnel who examined Kenami when he first arrived at the facility determined that he had no preexisting medical conditions. Once in custody, as a disciplinary measure for talking, Kenami was forced to perform extreme amounts of exercise—a technique used across Afghanistan and Iraq. Then his hands were bound behind his back with plastic handcuffs, he was hooded, and forced to lie in an overcrowded cell. Kenami was found dead the morning after his arrest, still bound and hooded. No autopsy was conducted; no official cause of death was determined. After the Abu Ghraib scandal, a review of Kenami’s death was launched, and Army reviewers criticized the initial criminal investigation for failing to conduct an autopsy; interview interrogators, medics, or detainees present at the scene of the death; and collect physical evidence. To date, however, the Army has taken no known action in the case.
Another infamous case from Iraq involved a CIA “ghost” detainee named Manadel al-Jamadi, who was tortured to death by a CIA interrogation team at Abu Ghraib prison in November 2003. Pictures of Abu Ghraib guards Charles Graner and Sabrina Harman posing with al-Jamadi’s dead body, the so-called Ice Man, were among the most notorious of the Abu Ghraib photographs published in April 2004. A CIA officer named Mark Swanner and an interpreter led the team that interrogated al-Jamadi. Nine Navy personnel were also implicated. An autopsy conducted by the U.S. military five days after al-Jamadi’s death found that the cause: “blunt force injuries complicated by compromised respiration.” Reporting by The New Yorker’s Jane Mayer and NPR’s John McChesney revealed that al-Jamadi was strung up from handcuffs behind his back, a torture tactic sometimes called a “Palestinian hanging.” After an investigation, the CIA referred the case to the Department of Justice for possible criminal prosecution of the CIA personnel involved, but no charges were ever brought. Prosecutors accused 10 Navy personnel of the crime; nine were given nonjudicial punishments, such as rank reductions and letters of reprimand, and a 10th was acquitted.
The government is not unaware of these homicides. In April 2006, a colleague of mine at Human Rights Watch and I met with Department of Justice criminal-division officials and requested information and updates on this case and several others. Justice officials were familiar with these cases, but our pleas for information were rejected.
There may be other CIA homicides yet uncovered. One case of concern involves a detainee in the CIA’s detention program named Hassan Ghul, a Pakistani who was arrested in northern Iraq in January 2004. Ghul’s interrogation was discussed in one of the May 10, 2005, Office of Legal Counsel memos signed by OLC head Steven Bradbury. Ghul’s name is mostly redacted but appears by mistake in one part of the memo.
I am starting to suspect that Ghul might be dead. After all, his name was redacted from the OLC memo, unlike that of other CIA detainees now at Guantánamo. Why would the CIA be afraid of mentioning Ghul? CIA doctors appear to have determined that Ghul was in poor health when he was captured, in fact, too unhealthy to be waterboarded. Unlike other former CIA detainees, human-rights groups have not confirmed that he was rendered to Pakistan or to a third country. Did the CIA perhaps torture Ghul to death? We do not know. He has now completely disappeared.
The CIA appears to have had some close calls with detainees dying. The May 10, 2005, Bradbury memo suggests that one of the CIA’s detainees—likely Abu Zubaydah or Khalid Sheikh Mohammad—stopped breathing or lost consciousness at one point during their waterboarding: According to the CIA’s Office of Medical Services, in their “limited experience... extensive sustained use of the waterboard can introduce new [possibly lethal] risks.” (To the best of our knowledge, the only “experience” the CIA has with waterboarding being used extensively or in a sustained manner, is with Abu Zubaydah and Khalid Shaikh Mohammad). The memo explains: “Most seriously, for reasons of physical fatigue of psychological resignation, the subject may simply give up, allowing excessive filling of the airways and loss of consciousness. An unresponsive subject should be righted immediately, and the integrator should deliver a sub-xyphoid thrust to expel the water. If this fails to restore normal breathing, aggressive medical intervention is required....” The memo also notes that CIA doctors present during waterboarding sessions stood by with necessary equipment to perform a tracheotomy if necessary: “[W]e are informed that the necessary emergency medical equipment is always present—although not visible to the detainee—during any application of the waterboard.”
It would be overly simplistic to suggest that every detainee death in U.S. custody and every act of abuse was part of an authorized and ordered interrogation program designed and run from the highest levels of the Bush administration. Some deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan appear to have involved military or CIA personnel going “off the rails” and engaging in abusive conduct beyond what even White House lawyers had in mind when they crafted their “enhanced interrogation” policies. And some torture techniques were already in use in Afghanistan and spread there earlier than they were even formally approved.
Yet directly or directly, abuse spread and worsened—detainees started dying. Unlike torture, however, homicide is an uncomplicated crime. A criminal homicide occurs when a person or set of persons simply causes the death of another without legal justification. There is little nuance, little room for escape. Once a person is dead, the killer and those assisted him, those who solicited his crime or aided or abetted it, are accomplices.
The bottom line is that many detainee homicides in Iraq and Afghanistan were the direct result of approval and orders from the highest levels of government, and that high officials in the government are accomplices. Any meaningful investigation of those homicides would reveal the initial authorizations and their link to the homicides.
Homicide presents legal issues impossible to ignore. Attorney General Eric Holder and the Department of Justice cannot conclude their deliberations about Bush-era torture policies without closely investigating the homicide cases tied to them. One cannot speak glibly of “policy differences” and “looking forward” and “distraction” when corpses are involved.
Xtra Insight: Scott Horton: Justice Department Probe Slams Bush Lawyers Over Torture Ethics
John Sifton is a private investigator and attorney based in New York. His firm, One World Research, carries out research for law firms and human-rights groups, including in South Asia, the Middle East, and North Africa. He has conducted extensive investigations into the CIA interrogation and detention program.







exploora
People really think that allegedly torturing people like this is really going to stop terrorism?
In many ways this is a form of terrorism and doesn't appear to gather useful information any more than 911 style terrorism appears to work in keeping foreigners out, if anything it bring foreigners in.
n2chat
You are right, and it makes the rest of the world look on us as disregarding human rights, the same thing we condemn other countries for. Hypocritical, isn't it?
connie47
This story just keeps on getting worse. Obama, whom I support in general, is writing himself a black page in world history if he does not do something and do it soon.
CorporateRobot
Connie, he can't do it, because it cannot be done. To do so would set a precedent that would end the autonomy of the Presidency. Don't forget, each successive administration has pushed, pulled, and bullied to make the highest office in the land stand above the law.
Who could ever forget the launching of an invasion of another country, and THEN, going to the Congress for approval and a declaration of war?
Banjo1
Human Rights Watch has the same politics as Code Pink. Handle any of its "findings" with a 10-foot pole.
Ritarita
Facts
Please.
theoPitt
Yes, please, let us see the facts. I would have thought that if 100 plus prisoners were tourtured to death, it would have been on the network news. Even Fox would have said something about it!
Ritarita
Why theo?
You were
Not even allowed
To look at
Coffins.
ncopas
"even Fox would have said something"... what makes you think that??
heaterbox
people like john sifton, see conspiracy behind every corner, Oh My !! I meant Republican corners. They never seem to complain about Democratic intervention's like to one still going on in Balkins, or Korea ( Harry Truman started that one)
mbgillil
Human Rights Watch criticizes everyone equally. Who exactly are they favoring here?
This comment has been removed by The Daily Beast's editors.
DreddBlog
The fox replies "what feathers" when asked if it has been taking good care of the chickens and what is that on your lips.
The Bush II Department of Just Us has been resurrected:
http://blogdredd.blogspot.com/2009/05/resurrected-department-of-just-us. html
RussianHatGuy
I agree with Connie. I also think it is a mark of strength to admit wrong doing, not a weakness.
What is weak is to hide behind lawyers and propaganda.
Dave1959
Repeat after me .. Bush was right, Bush was right, Bush was ... Can this get more funny ? Re recent U-Turn on military trials. If obama keeps this up, his next apology tour will be his election !!
johnjohnson68510
Well, it seems The Hague should be putting these people to trial, despite our huge influence and pressure not to.
MrCleaveland
This is very disturbing. Is there any actual evidence that 100 people were tortured to death? If so, the killers must be punished. If not, this "researcher"/"reporter" ought to be punished for fabricating such serious charges.
ajhil3
Let me get this straight. You read the article and didn't notice any references to the evidence? How about the determination by an Army medical examiner that Dilawar's death at Bagram AFB was a "homicide"?
Johnnyappleseed
Facts, er,uh, er facts, why confuse Mr Sifton.
Estimates are just that estimates,he should be doing articles for PETA.
pgs1308
you people are idiots these people are responsible for killing thousands of people, we killed 100 so in my book thats 100 less terrorist in the world.
connie47
Your book needs some fleshing out in the history, facts and ethics departments, not to mention grammar.
motrbotr
Grammer is irrelevant when discounting liberal agendas. Ethics are also irrelevant come to think of it.
Personally, I think all incoming administrations should scour the records and decisions of all outgoing administrations for wrongdoings. Because #1, the have nothing better to do. #2 That is what liberals would want except for when its a democratic president leaving office because then that would be unfair or actually it will probably be considered racist when Obama leaves, to question any decision he has made. Oh, I forgot, he is the Annointed One. He doesnt make mistakes. Silly me. Well, anyhow, you are stupid and ignorant if you think that an investigation would accomplish anything other than start a precedent that would be followed by every incoming adminstration. You are all living in a dream world.
Ritarita
But motr-
I don't
Think the last
Democratic
President
Got a chance
To leave office
Before the
Investigations started.
Using that precedent
The Dems would
Be little behind
Schedule.
McLeod396
motrbotr is a hater.
orourke
Dear McLeod396,
The only haters here seem to be the liberals.
You people are nasty and rude when a Republican is in office, and you are nasty and rude when a Socialist is in office. What makes you people happy? Oh wait, I know, you would be happy if the ENTIRE WORLD AGREED with EVERYTHING YOU SAID AND DID, right?
ncopas
orourke, nicely stated. You uphold your party's values with great aplomb.
Nothing like being nasty and rude while calling someone nasty and rude.
And showing a total lack of respect for the first man in eight years who's willing to take on the task of saving your sorry ass from the hole you've dug for yourself, very eloquent.
OH, and acting as if democrats are impossible to please and are never satisfied unless everyone agrees with them, when, by the very virtue of you saying so, you show that you are in fact more intolerant and unable to handle people who think differently than any democrat ever could be... very classy.
Yessir, you make your party proud. :)
ncopas
motrbotr, did u spell grammar wrong on purpose? hope so...
but i doubt cuz due to your total lack of logic, and conclusions that came straight from your anal cavity, i'd guess that you're an uneducated republican who'd rather rape a minority than see a deserving person get proper health care
"it will probably be considered racist when Obama leaves" lol, yeah, probably.
"He doesn't make mistakes"... uh, unless you ask any republican in America right now. Cuz that's all they talk about... idiot.
ncopas
wow. And you are exactly what's wrong with America. You don't deserve your citizenship or your freedom.
I hope there's a hell, for scum like you.
BoshSpong
This is the result of deregulation of military interrogation practices.
Some people seem to believe that might makes right and that one can achieve anything trough the application of violence. These folks are basic in their thinking and their thought processes leave no room for an examination of any matter.
This "make my day" type of reaction would seem proper amongst pubescent boys - it is not the stuff of mature men and women.
Unless the room is cleared and the matter fully aired out with the proper outcomes to the parties involved, we are doomed to repeat this sad chapter.
If President Obama stops this process from reaching its natural outcome - his administration will suffer and his legacy will be tremendously diminished.
confused
The torture issue will continue to be a "dead chicken around our neck" until a through investigation is concluded . If the investigation finds that crimes were committed, there must be prosecutions. Get this out in the open so we can move on.
SharksBreath
pgs1308: How many Iraqi's and American's have died in our search for weapons that were never there.
Do you realize the next time a country decides to eliminate there enemy there isn't a damn thing we can say about it.
Remember Georgia.
Do you know a North Korean spokesman responded to a question about the health of an American reporter they arrested with, " THIS IS NOT GUANTANOMO".
In other words stupid it wasn't worth it.
SharksBreath
Seems to be plenty of facts in the link he provided.
http://www.pubrecord.org/torture/874-senate-panels-report-links-detainee s-murders-to-bushs-torture-policy.html
sippewissett
I believe we are in for a string of stories like this, some of which will leak out, some of which will be exposed because you can't conduct a war without "collateral damage". Bush got us into two wars of dubious purpose and along with that go torture and homicide. There's more to come, believe me -- assuming that the Bush clean-up team didn't purge their files completely as they left office. (Remember that their email system allowed for deletions from the server!)
BTW everyone, ignore 'banjo1'. He rants all the time, never with facts to back up his diatribes.
Thank you.
As a first time user, your comment has been submitted for review. It can take anywhere from a few hours to a day or two for your comment to be reviewed, depending on the time of week and the volume of comments we receive.