Faked Interrogations

Get your news from a source that’s not owned and controlled by oligarchs. Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily.


Former Army Sgt. Erik Saar has come out of the woodwork to talk about his 7-month long experience as a translator in the Guantanamo detention center. His book, Inside the Wire is scheduled for a May 2nd release. Saar, meanwhile, recently did an interview with CBS discussing his experience at Guantanamo. The book appears to verify a lot of previously-discussed interrogation abuses, including alleged incidents of women sexually harassing detainees as an interrogation strategy. One somewhat new allegation, meanwhile, is that mock interrogations were staged for members of Congress and other visitors to the Guantanamo prison.

Saar said the military chose detainees for the mock interrogations who previously had been cooperative and instructed them to repeat what they had told interrogators in earlier sessions. ‘They would ask the interrogator to go back over the same information,’ he said, calling it a ‘fictitious world’ created for visitors.

This isn’t entirely surprising. Lawyers who have visited the prison had suspicions that the interrogations were choreographed. But this is disturbing stuff. If Saar’s account is true, the whole argument that torture and illegal interrogation procedures occurred because of a lack of concrete rules and oversight becomes moot. If in fact the military was choreographing an “alternate” interrogation procedure for outsiders to see, then it seems obvious that they understood the difference between what was acceptable and what was not.

Some might argue that the military staged these interrogations because they knew that “outsiders” can’t understand the circumstances of the war on terror, and are therefore not in a position to understand the lengths that interrogators have to go to. But the fact that Saars, and others, are telling these stories reveals that even those on the inside have difficulty understanding the violence and racism that seem to pervade the “war on terror.” In the end, it’s probably better for the military to confront these issues head-on (an independent investigation into detainee abuses would be a good start) rather than have disillusioned soldiers continue to circulate insider accounts.

From the desk of Mother Jones CEO, Monika Bauerlein...

Newsrooms can be funded in many ways. One of the most controversial (and volatile) ways is by a for-profit corporation or a billionaire owner. We see it across the headlines on a weekly basis: the claw backs in public media, the gutting of The Washington Post, the bending over backwards to appeal to Trump and his allies.

But not here.

When Mother Jones first started publishing 50 years ago, our founders made a critical decision: to be a reader-supported nonprofit. They knew that no corporate owner would be interested in a muckraking newsroom; they also knew that no muckraking newsroom would be interested in following the agenda of a corporate owner.

And so, we’ve been reader-funded for half a century. We rely on contributions from our readers—readers like you—whether it’s $50, or $15 a month, or whatever fits your budget. People give what they can, and every donation makes a difference for our newsroom, which has grown tremendously—in size and reach and renown—since its inception in 1976.

You may be wondering: What does it take to publish an investigation? And what does my donation actually fund? The answers are one and the same: It takes people, resources, and time. And that’s what your donation funds directly.

Every donation Mother Jones receives from readers fortifies our newsroom, whether we’re covering underreported scandals out of Washington, DC, or the most important news of the day. And right now, each donation will be doubled because of our $50,000 match. So when you make a donation—$5, $50, any amount—it’ll go twice as far.

Your support keeps us going. If you’re able, donate today.

Thanks for reading.

—Monika

From the desk of Mother Jones CEO, Monika Bauerlein...

Newsrooms can be funded in many ways. One of the most controversial (and volatile) ways is by a for-profit corporation or a billionaire owner. We see it across the headlines on a weekly basis: the claw backs in public media, the gutting of The Washington Post, the bending over backwards to appeal to Trump and his allies.

But not here.

When Mother Jones first started publishing 50 years ago, our founders made a critical decision: to be a reader-supported nonprofit. They knew that no corporate owner would be interested in a muckraking newsroom; they also knew that no muckraking newsroom would be interested in following the agenda of a corporate owner.

And so, we’ve been reader-funded for half a century. We rely on contributions from our readers—readers like you—whether it’s $50, or $15 a month, or whatever fits your budget. People give what they can, and every donation makes a difference for our newsroom, which has grown tremendously—in size and reach and renown—since its inception in 1976.

You may be wondering: What does it take to publish an investigation? And what does my donation actually fund? The answers are one and the same: It takes people, resources, and time. And that’s what your donation funds directly.

Every donation Mother Jones receives from readers fortifies our newsroom, whether we’re covering underreported scandals out of Washington, DC, or the most important news of the day. And right now, each donation will be doubled because of our $50,000 match. So when you make a donation—$5, $50, any amount—it’ll go twice as far.

Your support keeps us going. If you’re able, donate today.

Thanks for reading.

—Monika

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

INDEPENDENT. BECAUSE OF YOU.

Mother Jones has no billionaires calling the shots—just readers like you making fearless reporting possible

Donate