Faked Interrogations

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

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.


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend