U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

94–891PDF 2004

DIRECTING THE SECRETARY OF STATE TO TRANSMIT TO THE

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES DOCUMENTS IN THE

POSSESSION OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE RELATING TO

THE TREATMENT OF PRISONERS AND DETAINEES IN IRAQ,

AFGHANISTAN AND GUANTANAMO BAY

MARKUP

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON 

INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

ON

H. Res. 699

JULY 15, 2004

Serial No. 108–120

Printed for the use of the Committee on International Relations

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.house.gov/international—relations 

(II)

COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 

HENRY J. HYDE, Illinois, Chairman 

JAMES A. LEACH, Iowa 

DOUG BEREUTER, Nebraska 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey, 

Vice Chairman 

DAN BURTON, Indiana 

ELTON GALLEGLY, California 

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida 

CASS BALLENGER, North Carolina 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California 

PETER T. KING, New York 

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio 

AMO HOUGHTON, New York 

JOHN M. MCHUGH, New York 

ROY BLUNT, Missouri 

THOMAS G. TANCREDO, Colorado 

RON PAUL, Texas 

NICK SMITH, Michigan 

JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania 

JEFF FLAKE, Arizona 

JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia 

MARK GREEN, Wisconsin 

JERRY WELLER, Illinois 

MIKE PENCE, Indiana 

THADDEUS G. MCCOTTER, Michigan 

KATHERINE HARRIS, Florida 

TOM LANTOS, California 

HOWARD L. BERMAN, California 

GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York 

ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American 

Samoa 

DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey 

ROBERT MENENDEZ, New Jersey 

SHERROD BROWN, Ohio 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

ROBERT WEXLER, Florida 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

WILLIAM D. DELAHUNT, Massachusetts 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

BARBARA LEE, California 

JOSEPH CROWLEY, New York 

JOSEPH M. HOEFFEL, Pennsylvania 

EARL BLUMENAUER, Oregon 

SHELLEY BERKLEY, Nevada 

GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California 

ADAM B. SCHIFF, California 

DIANE E. WATSON, California 

ADAM SMITH, Washington 

BETTY MCCOLLUM, Minnesota 

BEN CHANDLER, Kentucky 

THOMAS E. MOONEY, SR., Staff Director/General Counsel 

ROBERT R. KING, Democratic Staff Director 

JOCK SCHARFEN, Chief Counsel 

DANIEL FREEMAN, Counsel/Parliamentarian 

LIBERTY DUNN, Staff Associate 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page

MARKUP OF 

H. Res. 699, Directing the Secretary of State to transmit to the House of 

Representatives documents in the possession of the Secretary of State relating to the treatment of prisoners and detainees in Iraq, Afghanistan, and 

Guantanamo Bay ................................................................................................. 2

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD 

The Honorable Henry J. Hyde, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Illinois, and Chairman, Committee on International Relations: Prepared 

statement .............................................................................................................. 10

Letter addressed to the Honorable Duncan Hunter, a Representative in Congress from the State of California, and Chairman, Committee on Armed 

Services, from the Honorable Donald H. Rumsfeld, Secretary, U.S. Department of Defense .................................................................................................... 15

Letter addressed to the Honorable Henry J. Hyde from Ryan Henry, Principal 

Deputy Under Secretary, U.S. Department of Defense .................................... 17

The Honorable Betty McCollum, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Minnesota: Prepared statement and submitted materials ........................... 26

APPENDIX 

The Honorable Nick Smith, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Michigan: Prepared statement ........................................................................ 35

The Honorable Diane Watson, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of California: Prepared statement ...................................................................... 35

(1)

DIRECTING THE SECRETARY OF STATE TO TRANSMIT TO 

THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES DOCUMENTS IN THE 

POSSESSION OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE RELATING TO 

THE TREATMENT OF PRISONERS AND DETAINEES IN 

IRAQ, AFGHANISTAN AND GUANTANAMO BAY 

THURSDAY, JULY 15, 2004

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, 

Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 3:15 p.m., in Room 

2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Henry J. Hyde (Chairman of the Committee) Presiding. 

Chairman HYDE. The Committee will come to order. Pursuant to 

notice, I now call up H. Res. 699, directing the Secretary of State 

to transmit to the House of Representatives documents in the possession of the Secretary of State relating to the treatment of prisoners and detainees in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay for 

purposes of markup and move its adverse recommendation to the 

House. 

[H. Res. 699 follows:]

2

1

IV

108TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 699

Directing the Secretary of State to transmit to the House of Representatives

documents in the possession of the Secretary of State relating to the

treatment of prisoners and detainees in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Guantanamo Bay.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 25, 2004

Mr. CONYERS (for himself, Ms. PELOSI, Mr. HOYER, Mr. MENENDEZ, Mr.

CLYBURN, Mr. DINGELL, Mr. OBEY, Mr. RANGEL, Mr. WAXMAN, Mr.

SKELTON, Mr. LANTOS, and Mr. HINCHEY) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on International Relations

RESOLUTION

Directing the Secretary of State to transmit to the House

of Representatives documents in the possession of the

Secretary of State relating to the treatment of prisoners

and detainees in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Guantanamo

Bay.

1 Resolved, That the Secretary of State is directed to

2 transmit to the House of Representatives not later than

3 14 days after the date of the adoption of this resolution

4 all documents in the possession of the Secretary of State,

5 except those documents that have been found by a court

6 to be protected by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure


94891a.AAB
3

2

•HRES 699 IH

1 6(e), relating to the treatment of prisoners or detainees

2 in Iraq, Afghanistan, or Guantanamo Bay and any req3 uisite instructions for handling such documents,

4 including—

5 (1) every report, memorandum, or complaint

6 from the International Committee of the Red Cross

7 relating to the treatment of detainees or prisoners

8 and any documents that reference such memo9 randum, report, or complaint by the Secretary of

10 State or by any agency under the Secretary of State;

11 (2) every report, memorandum, or complaint

12 from Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International,

13 Iraqi Human Rights Association, Afghan Human

14 Rights Commission, Physicians for Human Rights,

15 or Human Rights First relating to the treatment of

16 detainees or prisoners and any documents that ref17 erence such memorandum, report, or complaint by

18 the Secretary of State or by any agency under the

19 Secretary of State;

20 (3) every document relating to interrogation

21 techniques;

22 (4) every internal report of a law enforcement,

23 military, or intelligence agency or organization con24 cerning interrogation or detention operations;


94891a.AAC
4

3

•HRES 699 IH

1 (5) every internal report of a law enforcement,

2 military, or intelligence agency in response to allega3 tions that the treatment of prisoners or detainees

4 violated or continues to violate international or

5 American law;

6 (6) every document and memorandum regard7 ing the applicability of the Geneva Conventions, the

8 Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhu9 man or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, the

10 International Covenant on Political and Civil Rights,

11 sections 2340–2340A of title 18, United States

12 Code, the War Crimes Act of 1996, and the Fifth,

13 Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments to the Con14 stitution of the United States to the treatment of

15 prisoners or detainees;

16 (7) every document and memorandum relating

17 to command relationships between military police

18 units and military intelligence units;

19 (8) every document and memorandum directing

20 personnel to abstain from using specific interroga21 tion techniques or to withdraw themselves from in22 terrogations being conducted by other departments;

23 (9) any Presidential directive or other writing

24 authorizing the use of interrogation tactics or claim25 ing the constitutional authority to do so;


94891a.AAD
5

4

•HRES 699 IH

1 (10) any documentation of training received by

2 the 800th Military Police Brigade and the 205th

3 Military Intelligence Brigade regarding the treat4 ment of prisoners or detainees;

5 (11) any documentation of special access pro6 grams as they were applied to prisoners or detain7 ees;

8 (12) all records of meetings regarding the treat9 ment of prisoners or detainees at which one or more

10 officials of the Department of State were present

11 and the presence of those officials is apparent from

12 the face of the record;

13 (13) every document and memorandum con14 cerning the practice of keeping prisoners or detain15 ees off the official roster;

16 (14) a list of every ongoing and completed in17 vestigation into the treatment of prisoners or detain18 ees, and any written reports produced by any such

19 investigation;

20 (15) every document relating to civilian con21 tract employees and their role in prisons;

22 (16) all written statements of prisoners or de23 tainees, military personnel, civilian employees of the

24 Federal Government, or civilian contractors regard25 ing the treatment of prisoners or detainees;


94891a.AAE
6

5

•HRES 699 IH

1 (17) all reports of interrogation of each pris2 oner or detainee that reflect a claim of abuse by

3 military or civilian personnel or by civilian contrac4 tors;

5 (18) any documents for work under contracts

6 (including subcontracts and task orders) and all re7 ports on such documents, for interrogation or trans8 lation work by CACI International, Titan Corpora9 tion, and any other entity that may have performed

10 such work;

11 (19) any documents or testimony presented to

12 or prepared by the Detainee Assessment Branch at

13 Abu Ghraib prison at any time after September 1,

14 2003 regarding the treatment of Iraqi prisoners or

15 detainees by members of the Armed Forces or by ci16 vilian contractors working in Iraq employed on be17 half of the Department of Defense;

18 (20) any complaint forms filled out and sub19 mitted at any time after March 1, 2003 by a mem20 ber of the Armed Services or by a civilian contractor

21 employed on behalf of the Department of Defense or

22 Central Intelligence Agency regarding the treatment

23 of detainees or prisoners; and


94891a.AAF
7

6

•HRES 699 IH

1 (21) any reports or documents reflecting the

2 death or injury of prisoners or detainees.

Æ


94891a.AAG
8

Chairman HYDE. Without objection, the resolution will be considered as read and open for amendment at any point. 

The Chair yields himself 5 minutes for purposes of a statement. 

Today, the Committee will consider H. Res. 699, directing the Secretary of State to transmit to the House documents in the possession of the Secretary of State relating to the treatment of prisoners 

and detainees in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay. 

The revelation of the abuse of Iraqi detainees shocked and horrified Americans. We are people of compassion and strong moral conviction. Citizens of the U.S. have a profound love of freedom and 

a great respect for the rule of law. Our system of constitutional 

government is anchored in these values, and that is what that distinguishes us from other countries that suppress freedom, democracy and the rule of law. 

And so it is because of our strongly held moral beliefs and our 

respect for the rule of law that investigations into detainee abuse 

must take place, probing questions must be asked, and steps must 

be taken to ensure that these types of abuses never recur. And 

this, in fact, is exactly what is ongoing today. 

On January 14, 2004, the day after specialist Joseph Darby 

placed an anonymous note describing photographs of abuse under 

the door of an Army criminal investigator, General Sanchez 

launched a criminal investigation immediately. General Ricardo 

Sanchez then asked for an administrative review of procedures at 

the Abu Ghraib facility, what has since become known as the 

Taguba report completed by Major General Taguba. 

It is this report, including all of the classified annexes, which is 

laid out before you on the table today and which runs into thousands of pages. This report is available to all Members of our Committee for their review. There are well over 140 criminal investigations into detainee abuse worldwide that are ongoing, thus far resulting in criminal or administrative actions against at least 12 individuals. These include the relief from duty of those in the prison 

chain of command and criminal referrals of several soldiers directly 

involved in abuse. 

In addition to this remarkable number of criminal investigations, 

there are six ongoing administrative investigations into the detainee scandal. Among these six is an independent bipartisan review panel led by former Secretary of Defense James Schlesinger, 

including former Secretary of Defense Harold Brown who served 

with distinction in President Carter’s Administration. The purpose 

of the Schlesinger panel is to the get the Members’ ‘‘independent, 

professional advice’’ on issues which the panel members find to be 

‘‘most pertinent’’ to the detainee allegations. 

Significant to the interest of this Committee, the panel members 

will ‘‘examine the pace, breadth and thoroughness of the existing 

investigations and determine whether additional investigations 

need to be initiated.’’ In other words, this is a bipartisan investigation of the investigations. 

The specific issues the Schlesinger panel will report on are wideranging and include, to name but a few, of the use of contractors, 

policies and procedures for detentions and interrogations, compliance with the Geneva Conventions, and the relationship with the 

International Committee of the Red Cross. 

9

As Chairman Hunter—as his letter to me indicates, the Administration has committed to briefing Members on this Committee on 

all six of the ongoing administrative investigations and, in the interest of transparency, to providing access to the reports when they 

are completed. The Administration will also brief our Members on 

the criminal investigations on a periodic basis upon request. 

In fact, the Administration has already provided to Congress a 

mound of documents from the administrative reports of Major Generals Ryder and Miller to the Taguba report, which alone is 6,000 

pages. The White House has also taken the extraordinary step of 

releasing approximately 260 pages of high-level documents, all of 

which are available to Members of this Committee, that reflect the 

thorough and deliberative process which the Administration undertook in developing its policies as our country waged the global war 

on terror. 

The Administration is also committed to providing Members of 

our Committee access to reports from the International Committee 

of the Red Cross relating to detainee issues worldwide. I am informed those reports should be available next week. 

I will not address in depth some of the peculiarities of the resolution before us today, other than to note that the majority of the 

documents described are best requested of the Secretary of Defense 

or the Director of Central Intelligence, or involve evidence in ongoing criminal investigations, and do not in any way involve the Secretary of State. 

Members of the Committee, we currently have enough reading 

material to keep us ensconced for the first 2 weeks of the August 

recess, with more to come. 

I urge Members to first review the documents that are in congressional possession now, including the Taguba Report, to review 

the International Committee of the Red Cross reports as they are 

made available to us in the coming days and to avail themselves 

of the opportunity to review the six administrative investigations 

as they are completed, before demanding reams more. 

I urge Members to take the time to carefully read these materials and review the results of the six ongoing investigations, especially the Schlesinger panel, before determining what more is necessary. It is not as if these matters are not being adequately investigated in a transparent manner—quite the contrary. What we are 

witnessing is an unprecedented range of criminal and administrative investigations, all of which in turn will be evaluated by a blue 

ribbon panel. We should allow these investigations the time needed 

to be completed. 

In the meantime, we should not divert further Executive Branch 

resources and energy in the midst of a global war. When these investigations are complete, and the Schlesinger panel reviews the 

issues and the adequacy of the other investigations, our Committee 

Members will have ample opportunity to pass judgment on whether 

the ongoing investigations unearthed all the facts and made persuasive judgments. 

When this time arrives and we have all the completed investigations before us, our Committee Members will be in a position to 

judge the Schlesinger panel report, along with the other five administrative and the 140-plus ongoing criminal investigations, and 

10

determine whether they measure up to the high standard of justice 

first expressed by our founding father George Washington in his 

General Order of July 7, 1775, when he said,

‘‘No Connections, Interests or Intercessions . . . will avail to 

prevent strict execution of Justice.’’

We certainly must push forward efforts to remedy the circumstances that allow the abuses at Abu Ghraib to occur. We certainly must—and—we owe it to the hundreds of thousands of soldiers who serve our country with honor and dignity, and we owe 

it to the American people. I urge Members to vote to adversely report H. Res. 699. 

And I turn to my friend and colleague, Tom Lantos, the Ranking 

Democrat Member, for his opening remarks. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hyde follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE HENRY J. HYDE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS, AND CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

Today the Committee will consider H. Res. 699, directing the Secretary of State 

to transmit to the House of Representatives documents in the possession of the Secretary of State relating to the treatment of prisoners and detainees in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Guantanamo Bay. 

The revelation of the abuse of Iraqi detainees shocked and horrified Americans. 

We are a people of great compassion and strong moral conviction. Citizens of the 

United States have a profound love of freedom and a great respect for the rule of 

law. Our system of constitutional government is anchored in these values, and it 

is these values that distinguish the United States from those countries that suppress freedom, democracy and the rule of law. 

It is because of our strongly held moral beliefs and our respect for the rule of law 

that investigations into detainee abuse must take place, probing questions must be 

asked, and steps must be taken to ensure that these types of abuses never recur. 

And this, in fact, is exactly what is ongoing today. 

On January 14, 2004, the day after Specialist Joseph Darby placed an anonymous 

note describing photographs of abuse under the door of an Army criminal investigator, General Sanchez launched a criminal investigation immediately. General Ricardo Sanchez then asked for an administrative review of procedures at the Abu 

Ghraib facility, what has since become known as the Taguba Report completed by 

Major General Taguba. It is this report, including all of the classified annexes, 

which is laid out before you on the table today and which runs into the thousands 

of pages. This report is available to all Members on our Committee for their review. 

There are well over 140 criminal investigations into detainee abuse worldwide 

that are ongoing, thus far resulting in criminal or administrative actions against at 

least 12 individuals. These include the relief from duty of those in the prison chain 

of command and criminal referrals of several soldiers directly involved in abuse. 

In addition to this remarkable number of criminal investigations, there are six ongoing administrative investigations into the detainee scandal. Among these six is an 

independent, bipartisan review panel, led by former Secretary of Defense James 

Schlesinger and including former Secretary of Defense Harold Brown who served 

with distinction in President Carter’s administration. 

The purpose of the Schlesinger panel is to get the Members’ ‘‘independent, professional advice’’ on issues which the panel members find to be ‘‘most pertinent’’ to the 

detainee allegations. Significant to the interests of this Committee, the panel members will ‘‘examine the pace, breadth, and thoroughness of the existing investigations, and determine whether additional investigations need to be initiated.’’ In 

other words, this is a bi-partisan investigation of the investigations. 

The specific issues the Schlesinger panel will report on are wide-ranging and include, to name but a few, the use of contractors, policies and procedures for detentions and interrogations, compliance with the Geneva Conventions, and the relationship with the International Committee of the Red Cross. 

As Chairman Hunter’s letter to me indicates, the Administration has committed 

to briefing Members of this Committee on all six of the ongoing administrative investigations and, in the interest of transparency, to providing access to the reports 

11

when they are completed. The Administration will also brief our Members on the 

criminal investigations on a periodic basis upon request. 

In fact, the Administration has already provided to Congress a mound of documents from the administrative reports of Major Generals Ryder and Miller to the 

Taguba Report, which alone is 6,000 pages. The White House has also taken the 

extraordinary step of releasing approximately 260 pages of high-level documents, all 

of which are available to the Members of this Committee, that reflect the thorough 

and deliberative process which the Administration undertook in developing its policies as our country waged the global war on terror. 

The Administration has also committed to providing Members of our Committee 

access to reports from the International Committee of the Red Cross relating to detainee issues worldwide. 

I will not address in depth some of the peculiarities of the Resolution before us 

today, other than to note that the majority of the documents described are best requested of the Secretary of Defense or the Director of Central Intelligence, or involve evidence in ongoing criminal investigations, and do not in any way involve the 

Secretary of State. 

Members of the Committee, we currently have enough reading materials to keep 

us ensconced for the first two weeks of August recess, with more to come. 

I urge Members to first review the documents that are in Congressional possession now (including the Taguba Report), to review the International Committee of 

the Red Cross reports as they are made available to us in the coming days, and to 

avail themselves of the opportunity to review the six administrative investigations 

as they are completed, before demanding reams more. I urge Members to take the 

time to carefully read these materials and to review the results of the six ongoing 

investigations, especially the Schlesinger panel, before determining what more is 

necessary. 

It is not as if these matters are not being adequately investigated in a transparent manner—quite the contrary. What we are witnessing is an unprecedented 

range of criminal and administrative investigations, all of which in turn will be 

evaluated by a blue ribbon panel. We should allow these investigations the time 

needed to be completed. 

In the meantime, we should not divert further executive branch resources and energy in the midst of a global war. When these investigations are complete, and the 

Schlesinger panel reviews the issues and the adequacy of the other investigations, 

our Committee Members will have ample opportunity to pass judgment on whether 

the ongoing investigations unearthed all the facts and made persuasive judgments. 

When this time arrives and we have all the completed investigations before us, 

our Committee Members will be in position to judge the Schlesinger panel’s report, 

along with the other five administrative and the 140-plus ongoing criminal investigations, and determine whether they measure up to the high standard of justice 

first expressed by our founding father, George Washington, in his General Order of 

July 7, 1775: ‘‘No Connections, Interests, or Intercessions . . . will avail to prevent 

strict execution of Justice.’’

We certainly must push forward efforts to remedy the circumstances that allowed 

the abuses at Abu Ghraib to occur. We certainly must—and—we owe it to the hundreds of thousands of soldiers who serve our country with honor and dignity, and 

we owe it to the American people. But the end goal of assuring that these types 

of abuses never reoccur will not be accomplished through this Resolution of Inquiry. 

I urge Members to vote to adversely report H. Res. 699. 

I now turn to my friend and colleague, Tom Lantos, the Ranking Democratic 

Member, for his opening remarks.

Mr. LANTOS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and let me first commend you for your typical serious, thoughtful and comprehensive 

statement. 

Mr. Chairman, I am sure that every Member of this Committee 

agrees that the disgusting pictures of Iraqi detainees being abused 

by members of our military was a disgrace. It was wholly inconsistent with the character of our Nation and the nature of our military. It has been an embarrassment to our Government, to our 

brave and dedicated troops in the field and to each of us. 

The question before us is, how will this Committee address such 

despicable acts? Mr. Chairman, in the aftermath of this episode, 

the Senate Armed Services Committee embarked on a thorough inVerDate Mar 21 2002 15:33 Aug 11, 2004 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 F:\WORK\FULL\M071504\94891.000 HINTREL1 PsN: SHIRL
12

quiry of this scandal, including hearing from the author of the 

original investigation of the Abu Ghraib Prison. I understand our 

friend Senator Warner is planning future hearings as well. 

It would seem obvious that such aberrant behavior would be ripe 

for a serious and full-ranging investigation by this House. And I 

thought the various Committees of jurisdiction would be the focal 

point of the investigation for our body. 

Regrettably, no such investigation has taken place. In fact, despite repeated requests by the Democratic leadership and Ranking 

Members of the relevant Committees, including myself, Members of 

the majority leadership have repeatedly said that an investigation 

is unwarranted and have criticized the Chairman of the Senate 

Armed Services Committee for asserting a proper role for Congress. 

Mr. Chairman, the position of the majority leadership is simply 

unacceptable. When the work of Government goes as far astray as 

it apparently has in this case, it is palpably clear that the legislative branch needs to exert more authority to provide both direction 

and oversight. 

This affair has damaged our country’s credibility. It undermines 

U.S. ability to promote human rights, to prevent torture, and it 

crippled our efforts to advance peace in the Middle East. To counteract these perceptions, we have to ensure that we thoroughly investigate these matters and be seen as doing so. Damage to our foreign policy of this magnitude can only be corrected by a full, independent investigation that is perceived as credible and relentless, 

including up the chain of command to the highest levels. 

Indeed, the recent replacement of General Fay with yet another 

officer in the investigation of actions of military intelligence officers 

has not been held in this regard. It raises further questions of who 

is looking at the actions on the civilian side. 

Mr. Chairman, the memoranda from the Department of Justice 

issued in August 2002 that have recently come to light highlight 

the need for an inquiry into this matter. These memos, which claim 

that the President can ignore U.S. Law and treaty obligations preventing torture and cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment, represent a usurpation of power by the Executive Branch written by 

lawyers who act as if they were arguing their case in court rather 

than giving the President their best advice. 

One aspect of this affair which demands our attention is the apparent unwillingness of the Department of Justice to consult with 

U.S. Government experts on international law, the Office of the 

Legal Advisor at the Department of State. It appears, Mr. Chairman, that after the State Department disagreed with the Justice 

and Defense Departments on the application of the Geneva Conventions to detainees in Afghanistan and at Guantanamo Bay, the 

Justice and Defense Departments decided not to consult State on 

these critical issues of international law. 

Mr. Chairman, we cannot allow a system of Government where 

experts are ignored and the President receives uninformed legal 

advice. Mr. Chairman, this is not an esoteric lawyer’s argument. 

When our Justice Department says it is legal to torture others, our 

enemies will point to our own statements to justify the maiming 

and killing of Americans. That is why we enter into and abide by 

13

international treaties of these types to help hold all others to the 

higher standard we believe in. 

In the light of the majority leadership’s refusal to sanction any 

investigation, we, on our side, have submitted identical resolutions 

of inquiry to each of the major Committees to help these Committees, hopefully on a bipartisan basis—and I want to underscore 

this. I don’t believe this is a partisan matter. 

I hope we can move on this matter on a bipartisan basis to obtain documents necessary to conduct our own investigation. The 

need to shed light on these documents should be self-evident, especially in the body commonly known as the People’s House. Senators 

from both parties have been living up to their responsibilities and 

calling the Administration to account for its policies. I fail to understand why all my colleagues in the House of Representatives do not 

see that this is the right thing to do. 

I hope that all of my colleagues on the Committee will step up 

to our Constitutional responsibilities by supporting this resolution 

and voting against the motion to report the resolution unfavorably. 

I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your giving me the courtesy of 

the time. 

Chairman HYDE. Thank you, Mr. Lantos. 

Mr. Leach, the Chair will recognize Members for 5 minutes 

should they wish to make an opening statement. Should they not 

wish to make a statement, they get a gold star. Is Mr Leach——

Mr. LEACH. Gold star. 

Chairman HYDE. Gold star for Mr. Leach. 

Mr. Bereuter? 

Mr. BEREUTER. I second the motion. 

Chairman HYDE. Mr. Bereuter?

Mr. BEREUTER. I am a gold star Member. 

Chairman HYDE. Gold star for Mr. Bereuter. 

The next name is Mr. Gallegly. 

Mr. GALLEGLY. I would like a gold star, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman HYDE. Thank you. You shall have a big one. 

Mr. Houghton? 

Gold star for you. 

Mr. McCotter? 

Mr. MCCOTTER. No. 

Chairman HYDE. Ms. Ros-Lehtinen? 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Silver star. 

Chairman HYDE. We are on a roll, if you don’t mind. 

Mr. LANTOS. I am enjoying this, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman HYDE. Mr. Chris Smith? 

Mr. SMITH OF NEW JERSEY. Mr. Chairman, I want to take 1 

minute, and I want to commend you on your very thoughtful statement. 

This is a very difficult issue. I would point out to my colleagues, 

there is an absolute consensus among all Members that torture, inhumane, cruel, degrading treatment is an abomination and not acceptable. The fact that you pointed out that there are six ongoing 

investigations, including an investigation of the investigations, suggests that some delay in this very broad reach of request is warranted. If we find that these investigations are somehow inferred, 

14

I would recommend that we do proceed with a more thorough investigation as articulated in the resolution. 

I would also point out that the Convention against torture 

couldn’t be more clear. No exceptional circumstances whatsoever 

whether a state of war, threat of war, political instability or any 

other public emergency may be invoked as a justification of torture. 

And an order from a superior officer or public authority may not 

be invoked as a justification for torture. We are signatories to that. 

I do believe that the overwhelming majority of American service 

men and women, and everyone else through the chain of command 

abides by that. 

Those bad apples that have committed these atrocities will be 

held to account. There are investigations that are ongoing. And I 

would say to my friends and colleagues, if anybody takes away 

from this markup that we don’t want the full truth, you are greatly 

mistaken. There are 164 detainee abuse investigations, like I said. 

There are six ongoing administrative investigations. There is a 

time to say, the investigations are ongoing and they are pervasive, 

they are thorough, but if they are found to be less than that, then 

we need to take additional action. 

Mr. BEREUTER. Would the gentleman yield? 

I would like to turn in my gold star because I think people could 

have the wrong impression. And I thank the gentleman for yielding. 

I think the Congress does less oversight than it should including 

on this issue. I think the minority is right in pushing for documentation to be released. 

But as I looked at the resolution—and I understand the gentleman saying you are doing it in all relevant Committees, this is 

misdirected to the Secretary of State. If you go over these, paragraph by paragraph, they are DoD documentation or they are CIA 

documents that are in demand. There is only one of them that relates specifically, as I read it, to the State Department. 

And I do think that number 12 is overly burdensome, because it 

says all records of all meetings regarding the treatment of prisoners or detainees at which one or more officials of the State Department were present. The presence of those officials is apparent 

from the face of the record. Meetings of this nature were held on 

numerous occasions by numerous officials and personnel levels. 

This is a matter that ought to be taken very seriously in the Intelligence Committee and in the Armed Services Committees of both 

bodies, but this is not an issue that we have with the Secretary of 

State. 

And I understand there is probably a recognition that this is a 

fact, but you are simply aiming at all Committees that potentially 

might have some oversight. 

Mr. LANTOS. Would my good friend yield for a second? 

Mr. BEREUTER. In a second. 

And I will point out to the Members that before us are two letters from Defense Department personnel, including Secretary 

Rumsfeld, in one case, directed to Chairman Hunter and to Chairman Hyde indicating those reports that are going to be or are already made available that relate to this resolution. 

[The information referred to follows:]

15


94891a.eps
16


94891b.eps
17

Mr. BEREUTER. So you are having some impact, or you have had 

some impact, or they are ahead of us on some of these issues. And 

I yield to the gentleman. 

Mr. LANTOS. I thank my friend for yielding. I would merely like 

to point out respectfully that many of the issues do in fact relate 

to the Department of State. They certainly relate to the Department of State in terms of these abuses having had an impact on 

the success of U.S. foreign policy. 

And at a time when we are living with a new regime on our side 

in Iraq, having moved from Ambassador Bremer’s jurisdiction to 

that of Ambassador Negroponte, who is a regular Ambassador of 

the State Department appointed by our Government as all other 

Ambassadors are, the State Department is directly involved in this 

matter, particularly the fact that the matter is an ongoing concern 

and ongoing set of negotiations. 

So while I have great respect for my friend from Nebraska, with 

all due respect, I would say that our Committee is not just seemingly involved; we are at the center of this issue, because what 

happened at the prison has had a major impact on U.S. foreign policy. 

Thank you for yielding. 


94891c.eps
18

Mr. BEREUTER. Would the gentleman yield? 

I failed to notice before that it was Mr. Smith’s turn to yield to 

the gentleman from California. I would just say, specific documentation is requested and that documentation, with one exception, is not from the State Department. 

I grant the gentleman’s very valid argument that what has happened abroad is very much in our jurisdiction. But as far as the 

request for documentation, they are not properly placed to the 

State Department, and therefore, this is a resolution that really is 

not appropriate for this Committee to advance. 

I thank the gentleman for yielding. 

Chairman HYDE. The gentleman’s time has expired. 

Mr. Menendez? 

Mr. MENENDEZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Chairman, today we are charged with a sacred trust given 

to Congress by the founding fathers and the American people to 

serve as a check and balance on the Executive Branch. As part of 

that role, Congress was designed to be the watchdog of the executive. Congressional oversight of the Executive Branch is a nonpartisan issue. 

Congressional oversight should be a bipartisan issue. For example, on July 19 of 1999, Chairman Dreier quoted Lee Hamilton, the 

former Democratic Chairman of this very Committee. Chairman 

Hamilton had said:

‘‘Oversight is designed to throw light on the activities of Government. It can protect the country from the imperial presidency and from bureaucratic arrogance. It can expose and prevent misconduct and maintain a degree of constituency influence in an Administration. The responsibility of oversight is to 

look into every nook and cranny of Government affairs.’’

And Chairman Dreier then concurred with his Democratic colleague. He said:

‘‘I wholeheartedly agree with our former distinguished former 

colleague, as Chairman of the Committee that is charged with 

the responsibility of safeguarding the privileges and prerogatives of this esteemed institution, I believe Congress should 

vigorously conduct oversight in order to fulfill the legacy of our 

founding fathers which is ultimately to preserve and protect 

our fragile democracy.’’

And I wholeheartedly agree with Chairman Dreier. Today, almost exactly 5 years later from those moments, U.S. soldiers have 

been accused of torturing prisoners. High-level Administration officials may have set a policy that encouraged that abuse. This scandal has unfairly hurt United States soldiers in Iraq and elsewhere 

around the world who risk their lives everyday and who would 

never engage in these despicable acts. Clearly, the situation not 

only merits congressional investigation but demands a thorough 

and comprehensive congressional investigation involving every 

Committee of jurisdiction. 

Does it not merit congressional oversight when our Justice Department has written a memo arguing that physical acts can only 

be considered torture when the physical pain results in ‘‘organ failVerDate Mar 21 2002 15:33 Aug 11, 2004 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 F:\WORK\FULL\M071504\94891.000 HINTREL1 PsN: SHIRL
19

ure, impairment of bodily function or death’’? Does it not merit congressional oversight when the White House counsel is urging the 

Administration to circumvent the Geneva Convention by making 

Taliban and al Qaeda detainees exempt from the Convention statutes? Does it not merit congressional oversight, particularly by this 

Committee, when the White House ignored memos written by the 

Secretary of State that the decision to circumvent international law 

would undermine the protection of our troops? 

Does it not merit congressional oversight when we still don’t 

know the full extent of what happened? New allegations surfaced 

just yesterday. The Washington Times reported that the Red Cross 

suspects that the United States is still hiding detainees from them. 

Does it not merit congressional oversight when this Administration has shown over and over a blatant disrespect for Congress, 

and it will try to thwart congressional investigation on this issue? 

Let me cite a few examples. First, Attorney General Ashcroft initially refused to give Congress the Justice Department’s memo on 

torture, saying that the President needed to get confidential advice 

from his Attorney General. And then, the Administration didn’t notify Congress of the existence of these pictures, and the Administration did not willingly turn over the Taguba report. And the Administration has even tried to thwart a member of their own party 

that has not allowed certain members of the Administration to testify before Chairman Warner’s Committee. 

We owe it to the American people and to the troops who are risking their lives around the world to fully investigate this matter. 

Failure to do so actually endangers our troops and our citizens 

around the world. The Geneva Convention and international norms 

exist to keep our own citizens and soldiers as well from being tortured by our enemies. 

The resolution along with the two others referred to Armed Services and Judiciary would require the Administration to provide the 

documents relating to the abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib and 

other places in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as Guantanamo so the 

Congress can conduct a comprehensive investigation. To me, another Member who would oppose it is shocking. The Republican 

leadership’s position opposing any investigation goes against the 

principles of the Constitution and the values of the American people. 

And as it relates to references to criminal investigations, I would 

say that that never stopped the majority from having a wide range 

of investigations of the Clinton Administration and carrying about 

the consequences of the uses of executive resources. I urge all the 

Members of this Committee from both parties to recall the words 

of both of our colleagues to ‘‘fulfill the legacy of the founding fathers and to ultimately preserve and protect our fragile democracy’’ 

by voting against the Chairman’s motion to report the resolution 

unfavorably and voting for the resolution. 

Chairman HYDE. Mr. Weller? You have no statement? 

Mr. Pence? 

Mr. PENCE. No statement. 

Chairman HYDE. Mr. Rohrabacher? 

20

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I will take the gold star rather than jumping 

into the political waters that seem to be swirling through this Committee room. 

Chairman HYDE. Ms. Lee? 

Ms. LEE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Let me briefly just say I fully support this resolution of inquiry, 

and I want to thank our colleague from Detroit and Ranking Member of the Judiciary Committee and all the co-sponsors for authoring this very important resolution of inquiry. 

Now, we have all seen the horrifying pictures of American soldiers tormenting and humiliating Iraqi prisoners, and we all know 

that this behavior does not characterize the tens of thousands of 

American soldiers, but it does endanger their lives. These pictures 

are horrifying because of the callous disregard for human rights 

that they show by individual American soldiers but also for the far 

more fundamental failures at the highest of leadership, failures 

that began with an Administration that actually, I believe, misled 

the Nation into war under false pretenses. 

So this resolution asks for the Secretary of State to transmit documents which are in the possession of the Secretary of State relating to the treatment of prisoners and detainees in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay. It makes sense. I think that it would 

help us restore much lost credibility in the world. It is a resolution 

that this Committee deserves to pass because we need the documents. We need the memos. We need to be able to read what took 

place and understand this. 

I don’t believe we have gone far enough in restoring America’s 

credibility in the world. It impacts our foreign policy, and I think 

this resolution helps begin to rectify some of the many difficult 

issues we are faced with throughout the world. We need to move 

on this resolution, and I urge the Committee, Mr. Chairman, to 

support it. 

And thank you, and I yield the balance. 

Chairman HYDE. The Committee will stand in recess pending 

two votes on the Floor. As soon as the votes are over, if the Members would return we can conclude our business. 

Recess is declared. 

[Recess.] 

Chairman HYDE. Ms. Berkley is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Ms. BERKLEY. Thank you Mr. Chairman. 

I am sure that every Member of this Committee agrees that the 

abuse of Iraqi detainees by members of the United States military 

was a disgrace. It is really inconsistent with the character of our 

Nation and the nature of our military. It has been an embarrassment for our Government, our brave and dedicated troops in the 

field and for each of us. 

The first evidence of these heinous acts was called to the attention of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld several months before 

it became public. Alarming and abundant documentation of horrific 

treatment of prisoners was provided to the Department of Defense 

by military personnel, the International Red Cross, Amnesty International and other sources. Yet, here we are months later. 

Mr. BURTON. I wish to be recognized——

Chairman HYDE. Order. 

21

Ms. BERKLEY. May I continue? 

Chairman HYDE. Yes, you may. 

Ms. BERKLEY. Here we are facing the same questions that we 

were several months ago. Who was making policy for the treatment 

of detainees at the prison, the military or unidentified intelligence 

personnel? Who was in charge? What was the chain of command? 

How far up the chain of command was their knowledge of the 

abuse? How could discipline break down among the troops without 

the senior officers knowing about it? 

The confusion grows about who was responsible and who will ultimately be held accountable except for a handful of low-ranking 

Reserve troops. There have been apologies by Administration officials from the President on down, but I get no sense that the key 

questions are being answered or that anyone in senior command or 

policy-making positions will be held appropriately accountable. The 

basic fact is that we still do not know what really went on. 

Regrettably, no investigation has taken place. In fact, Members 

of the Republican leadership have repeatedly said that an investigation is unwarranted and have criticized the Chairman of the 

Senate Armed Services Committee for asserting a proper oversight 

role for Congress. 

Even if the Administration’s investigations are ongoing, Congress 

should not be prevented from conducting its own inquiry. 

Mr. Chairman, if this Congress can investigate the Enron scandal in the middle of an SEC criminal investigation, we should certainly be able to investigate this horrendous series of events. Congress must exercise its proper oversight role. The American people 

and the world deserve to know the truth about what has transpired. If we are to regain our credibility in the international community, restore our national honor, this is the least we must do, 

and I say that knowing that the abuses on the other side have been 

nothing short of horrific. That doesn’t mean that the United States 

has to stoop to that level as well. 

I want to thank you, and I yield back the balance of my time. 

Chairman HYDE. Mr. Burton. 

Mr. BURTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I will just take a minute. As far as I know—and I think there 

may be more—there are at least six investigations going on right 

now. And one of the things that bothers me when I hear the rhetoric from my colleagues, many of whom I have great admiration 

for, on the other side, when they use terms like heinous acts and 

horrific treatment. 

You know, when I think of horrific treatment, I think of taking 

somebody and burning them alive in a car and blowing them up 

or taking them and having them sit in a chair in front of a bunch 

of people, one of which has a machete, that are going to chop his 

head off. Now that is what I consider a heinous act. 

There is no question that what went on in the prison should not 

have taken place. And we should hold those who were involved accountable. But there are investigations going on. We don’t need to 

have a whole bunch of additional investigations. And when we describe what went on in that prison, we should also talk about the 

horrible things that have been done to Americans and others over 

there that are not being mentioned. 

22

I haven’t been here all that long but I haven’t heard people say 

anything about the beheading of Americans and other people and 

dragging bodies around the streets to try and discourage people 

from staying there to fight against terrorist activities and threatening to behead another person so that a country like the Philippines will pull their troops out. So if we are going to talk about 

the things that went on in the prison, then let us make sure there 

is some balance here. Heinous acts, horrific treatment in my opinion don’t apply nearly as much to what we did as what has been 

going on with the terrorists over there with beheading and doing 

horrible things to people that are trying to bring about freedom 

and democracy in Iraq. 

Mr. MENENDEZ. Would the gentleman yield? 

Mr. BURTON. I will be happy to yield to my buddy. 

Mr. MENENDEZ. Thank you. 

I don’t disagree with you on the comments about the heinous 

acts. But prior to that, you mentioned that, because there are investigations that we shouldn’t investigate, and if I recall, the distinguished Chairman, that did not impede him from pursuing what 

he thought were legitimate investigations into the previous Administration. So I would hope that that would not impede us in this 

case as well. 

Mr. BURTON. Many of the investigations we conducted did not 

follow five or six other investigations, but we were just searching 

for the truth and the six investigations——

Mr. MENENDEZ. And we are searching for the truth here. 

Mr. BURTON. And the six investigations that are going on right 

now are searching for the truth. 

Chairman HYDE. The truth is your time has expired. 

Mr. Schiff. 

Mr. SCHIFF. Thank the Chairman. 

I want to join in the comments of my colleague from Nevada who 

points out the great many tens of thousands of Americans that are 

serving with distinction, bravery and courage in Iraq, Afghanistan 

and around the world. 

And I don’t disagree with the comments echoed by my colleague 

about the atrocities committed by the other side, the awful grim 

medieval beheadings that we have witnessed all too frequently, but 

of course, that is not what we are debating here today. 

What we are debating is Congress’ oversight responsibility or, as 

the case would have it, its lack of oversight in the present Congress. I find it remarkable. I think the last time we had a motion 

like this before us was whether Congress would look into the potential outing of a CIA agent over dissatisfaction with what her 

husband had to say on a claim that appears in the State of the 

Union address that had been bogus, and we could not investigate 

that, and we couldn’t request the documents in that. We didn’t 

have the time. 

And yet we have time in this Congress and in our sister Committee to have five hearings on gay marriage, which is admittedly 

an important issue, but still we don’t have time to oversee Abu 

Ghraib. We don’t have time to oversee the failure to find weapons 

of mass destruction. We don’t have time to oversee whether the 

Medicare actuary was threatened with being fired if he told ConVerDate Mar 21 2002 15:33 Aug 11, 2004 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 F:\WORK\FULL\M071504\94891.000 HINTREL1 PsN: SHIRL
23

gress what the Medicare bill would cost. We don’t have time to 

oversee any of these things, but we will have time for more hearings on gay marriage. Where is the sense of proportion? 

And I find it ironic that, while we are so diligent about overseeing one of the branches of Government, the judiciary—we are 

constantly critical of the judiciary. We want to take away their jurisdiction if we don’t like their decisions. We pass resolutions condemning the judiciary. We are willing to look into the conduct of 

specific judges who have the temerity to actually testify before Congress. And we go back and peruse their sentencing records if we 

don’t like what they have to say. We have time for that kind of 

oversight of the judicial branch but no time for oversight of the Executive Branch. I don’t think we deserve a gold star for that. I don’t 

think we are doing our job. 

It is one thing to give deference to the executive, and no one can 

criticize the majority for being deferential, but at some point, the 

deference approaches the edge of abdication. And in several areas, 

I think we are abdicating. We have abdicated to the executive all 

power to determine whether they can detain an American indefinitely without access to an attorney or judicial review. We are abdicating whether we should look into the oversight of what took place 

at Abu Ghraib and the investigations of Abu Ghraib. And I think 

that we are really deliberately, consciously, effectively ceding our 

authority to the executive. I don’t think that is what Congress 

ought to be doing. 

I think, frankly, we have overstepped our bounds vis-a-vis the judiciary. In undermining the judiciary, we undermine ourselves. But 

by providing no effective oversight of the executive, I think we also 

undermine our institutional role. And for me, it gives tangible evidence to the dangers inherent in one-party rule. And I would hope 

that we would think on our obligation, our historic obligation in 

this House. And I join my colleagues in support of the resolution 

and in opposition to a recommendation adverse to its passage and 

I yield back. 

Chairman HYDE. Chair recognizes himself for 3 minutes. 

You know, it is not that we have no time to investigate. That is 

hardly true. No one has said we don’t have time. 

The problem is we are engaged in overkill. There are investigations upon investigations upon investigations. There is an old saying, everything has been said, but everyone hasn’t said it. Everything is being investigated, but everybody hasn’t investigated it 

yet. And we all are amateur prosecutors. You can overdo something. The time and the personnel that this requires are from Defense, from Justice, from State. You compound that by having six 

investigations, plus the Schlesinger commission. 

If you are serious, then don’t get in the way of the investigations 

that are going on and let them do their job. Otherwise, one suspects there is a hint, a taint of politics in all of this. I am for every 

investigation that one can conceive of, but I am not for investigations piled upon investigations upon investigations. 

The House Armed Services Committee has primary jurisdiction. 

They are doing it. Just 2 days ago the Intelligence Committee held 

a hearing in the House. This is being heard to death and will continue. And as far as this resolution is concerned, I am for giving 

24

you everything you want that is within the State Department’s 

purview. And when we get there, we will be happy to do that. I will 

buy you a banana split if you come within 10 miles of that report, 

and I know you won’t. It will sit there, and nobody will look at, but 

you will demand a blizzard of papers. 

Mr. King of New York? 

Mr. KING. Mr. Chairman, actually, I just want to respond briefly 

to a point made by my good friend from California, Mr. Schiff. 

On the State of the Union, I would just suggest you read the 

British report put out yesterday by Lord Butler who said the 16 

words in the State of the Union were entirely valid and credible, 

and that was also sustained in last week’s Senate Intelligence report. 

Mr. SCHIFF. Would the gentleman yield? 

Mr. KING. Sure. 

Mr. SCHIFF. I would be delighted to consider the British report. 

I would like to see if we can develop one of our own in this Committee. 

And in deference to the Chairman, I can understand not wanting 

investigations piled on investigations, but one in this Committee 

would be nice. 

Mr. KING. Perhaps you and I can do our own. I refer you to section 499 of the Butler report. 

Chairman HYDE. Does any majority Member wish to be recognized to strike the last word? 

If not, Mr. Meeks is recognized. 

Mr. MEEKS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and again, I thought as 

the camera of history is rolling upon us as we speak, the rest of 

the world is looking at us. Our credibility is at stake, and we talk 

about democracy and how it is good, and we try to strengthen other 

legislative institutions and talk about their independence and how 

they should not be so dependent upon the Executive Branches or 

one particular President and we have to realize that the 

underpinnings of our democracy are our legislative bodies. 

And indeed, as I believe as this great Nation was set up, it was 

set up so there could be different roles by the Executive Branch 

and the judiciary and legislative. So I think it is our responsibility, 

if you will, that we must conduct our investigations, because we 

are called the People’s House. We are representatives of the people. 

And the people have elected us and depend upon us to look at matters that are very important to them. 

Now we have done investigations in this matter of the executive 

in the prior—in the Clinton Administration, of basically personal 

matters. This is a matter that is really important to the state of 

the Nation and our reputation with others abroad. 

Now, you indicate that there have been investigations on top of 

investigations going on, and I guess that is referring to investigations by the Defense Department, by the military and by the Justice Department. But that is just part of the problem, because 

these separate investigations do not have a coherent framework. 

They are being done in a piece-meal manner which may not allow 

us to get to the bottom of this matter. 

Moreover these investigations have not been without their own 

problems. For example, the investigations of the activities of miliVerDate Mar 21 2002 15:33 Aug 11, 2004 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 F:\WORK\FULL\M071504\94891.000 HINTREL1 PsN: SHIRL
25

tary intelligence officers was first undertaken by Major General 

Fay. He was recently replaced by another general who could explore issues further up the chain of command. This has not sparked 

any confidence. 

Furthermore, there remains some unanswered questions on the 

role of our civilian leadership. For example, I understand that in 

response to inquiry why he asked for General Miller to look at the 

Iraqi detention facilities, he responded that he did not request General Miller to come. This begs the question of who did what and 

why. And since General Miller’s report, which was criticized by 

other generals, is seen by many as to be the catalyst for the detainee abuses, this is a critical issue that, as far as I am aware, 

has not been investigated at all by anyone. 

And even if there are investigations, this should not prevent us 

from investigating. I also sit on the Financial Services Committee. 

And at that time, there were investigations on top of investigations 

by the SEC and others, but yet we still investigated the Enron 

scandal while the SEC was investigating. This is not something 

that is precedent setting. It is something we do as Members of the 

House of Representatives as part of the People’s House so we can 

make sure that the people of America know that we are taking our 

job seriously and our responsibility and, also, that as the cameras 

of history continue to roll that, when people begin to study what 

has taken place today, we will see in the history books that we in 

fact did our job in trying to protect the integrity of America. 

I am so concerned about those great men and women that we 

have in those uniforms that are serving their country everyday. 

And the only way we can make sure we keep them above the fry 

is by doing a thorough investigation because it is like, in any other 

profession, you want to make sure you root what was wrong, what 

went wrong, how it went wrong. That is why it is very important 

for us to pass this resolution today so that we make sure we are 

doing our job and taking care of our responsibilities, so that as our 

children and children’s children, as they look at us in history, they 

know that we did not idly sit on our hands and accept what someone else had to say. 

And I yield back. 

Chairman HYDE. Mrs. Napolitano. 

Mrs. NAPOLITANO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I was going to get a gold star, but I have some questions that 

I would like to pose. I certainly agree with some of my colleagues, 

especially my colleague Adam Schiff. Apparently, there has been a 

number of critical documents that have not been provided. My understanding is that we received a copy of a letter, and I find it in 

my file stating that we will have access to the report on Iraq. 

However, I don’t believe that it mentions the request from ICRC 

about Afghanistan or Guantanamo. Also, what about the records of 

when the Government received complaints from the Independent 

Afghan Human Rights Committee and the Iraq NGOs? What were 

the responses to these organizations and to ICRC? None of these 

issues have been included in the letter that has been offered. 

I am concerned about the conditions under which these materials 

were provided. I understand that these documents were made 

available to the Armed Forces for less than 48 hours. I would like 

26

someone to answer the questions about why there was no offer on 

the Iraq or the Guantanamo release of papers to this Committee 

as requested. 

Chairman HYDE. Would the gentlelady yield? 

Mrs. NAPOLITANO. Yes, I would. 

Chairman HYDE. I am informed there was an oversight on the 

letter, and it should include the Red Cross reports, and they will 

be made available as soon as they are available to us, which is, I 

am told, next week—is that correct? 

So the gentlelady is correct, but they are included. 

Mrs. NAPOLITANO. Thank you for the clarification. 

I really feel that if we are going to get a true picture of what has 

been happening with the prisoners and some of the issues that 

have been brought before this Committee, that we do a review and 

be sure the abuses don’t happen in the future. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. 

Chairman HYDE. Ms. McCollum, do you wish to make a statement? 

Ms. MCCOLLUM. Mr. Chairman, I will just enter my statement 

along with an attachment on a CIA article. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. McCollum follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE BETTY MCCOLLUM, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MINNESOTA

Mr. Chairman: 

I support H Res 699 and I encourage my colleagues to vote against any effort to 

report this legislation unfavorably. 

In the wake of abuse at Abu Ghraib, one would think the Administration would 

be looking for every possible opportunity to show the world that the United States 

is committed to openness and human rights. Unfortunately, the necessity of this legislation before us shows the Administration has no interest in doing so. 

The Bush Administration’s refusal to share documents in its possession with Congress regarding the abuse at Abu Ghraib is, in my opinion, a serious mistake. Actions by the Administration to withhold information from the American people only 

points to complicity. It gives those who look favorably upon the United States a reason to doubt our word; and it begs the question: who is really to blame for these 

terrible abuses? 

Unfortunately, the detainee scandal continues. Just this week, the ICRC stated 

that the Administration is hiding detainees in lockups across the globe. According 

to an article in the Washington Post, ‘‘Terrorism suspects reported by the FBI as 

captured have never turned up in detention centers, and the United States has 

failed to reply to (ICRC) demands for a list of everyone it is holding’’. At this time, 

I ask unanimous consent to insert in the record of this hearing a recent Washington 

Post editorial on this specific subject. 

This action by the Administration, on top of the abuse scandals that have engulfed our nation and our world, only digs the hole deeper. People around the world 

want to trust U.S. leadership and they want to believe our President’s words, but 

like many Americans, they feel deceived. The torture at Abu Ghraib, the absence 

of weapons of mass destruction and the ever changing justifications that led us to 

war in Iraq have shattered our nation’s international credibility. It is time for the 

Bush Administration to promote the same democratic ideals at home as we do 

abroad. 

Last month, I, along with 12 of my colleagues, offered one way to improve our 

international credibility: We asked the President to invite the U.N. Special 

Rapporteur on Torture to investigate our military prison facilities in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. I believe the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture 

can provide the unquestionable level of transparency required to address unanswered questions and restore U.S. credibility. At this time, I also ask unanimous 

consent to insert a copy of this letter into the record of the hearing. 

We have not heard the full truth from this Administration—there is still more to 

be told. 

27

Again, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation and encourage my colleagues to do the same. 

THE CIA’S PRISONERS

The Washington Post 

Thursday, July 15, 2004; Page A20

FOR DECADES the United States led the denunciation of despots whose enemies 

‘‘disappear’’—vanish into official custody, with no accounting for their whereabouts 

or treatment, no notification of their families and sometimes, no acknowledgement 

that they are being held. Now that same term is being applied to prisoners held 

by the Bush administration in the war on terrorism. According to the International 

Red Cross, a number of people apparently in U.S. custody are unaccounted for. Most 

are believed to be held by the CIA in secret facilities outside the United States. Contrary to the Geneva Conventions, the detainees have never been visited by the Red 

Cross; contrary to U.S. and international law, some reportedly have been subjected 

to interrogation techniques that most legal authorities regard as torture. According 

to the independent group Human Rights Watch, this exceptional practice is ‘‘perhaps unprecedented in U.S. history.’’ Like the Pentagon’s mishandling of Iraqi detainees, it cries out for congressional review and reform. 

At least a dozen of the CIA detainees are senior figures in the al Qaeda organization, such as Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, an alleged organizer of the attacks of Sept. 

11, 2001, and Abu Zubaida, the group’s operations chief. Few question their status 

as dangerous enemy combatants or the need to interrogate them about al Qaeda’s 

networks and plans for attacks—and no one suggests that they have been murdered, 

like many of the ‘‘disappeared’’ in other countries. But some of these men have been 

held incommunicado since before April 2002, or long past the time when urgent 

questioning or strict seclusion might have been necessary. Yet still the administration refuses to reveal where they are or allow visits by the Red Cross—something 

the United States often has advocated for prisoners elsewhere in the world, including other terrorists. The White House reportedly has exempted the CIA’s prisoners 

from the reviews that have been granted to detainees held at the Guantanamo Bay, 

Cuba, prison. And it has not disclosed the interrogation techniques approved for use 

by the CIA, though it has released those for Guantanamo. 

What is known, mostly through leaks to the media, is that several of the CIA’s 

detainees probably have been tortured—and that a controversial Justice Department opinion defending such abuse was written after the fact to justify the activity. 

According to reports in The Post, pain medication for Abu Zubaida, who suffered 

from a gunshot wound in the groin, was manipulated to obtain his cooperation, 

while Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was subjected to ‘‘water boarding,’’ which causes 

the sensation of drowning. Notwithstanding the Justice Department opinion, parts 

of which recently were repudiated by the White House, U.S. personnel responsible 

for such treatment may be guilty of violating the international Convention Against 

Torture and U.S. laws related to it. 

Nor has the CIA’s illegal behavior been limited to senior al Qaeda militants. The 

agency has been responsible for interrogating suspects in both Afghanistan and 

Iraq, and it is believed to have held a number in secret detention facilities. According to official reports, the identities of several in Iraq were deliberately concealed 

from the Red Cross, a violation of the Geneva Conventions. At least two detainees 

have died while being interrogated by CIA personnel. One CIA contractor has been 

charged with assault by the Justice Department in the case of one of the deaths, 

and at least two other cases are reportedly under investigation. But no higher-ranking CIA officials have been held accountable for the abuses or the decisions that led 

to them, even though it is now known that former CIA director George J. Tenet was 

directly involved in the ‘‘ghost detainee’’ cases in Iraq. 

The Pentagon and Congress are investigating the Army’s handling of foreign detainees; though they are slow and inadequate, these probes contrast with the almost 

complete absence of scrutiny of the CIA’s activity. This failure of oversight must be 

corrected. Though the United States is at war, it cannot be acceptable to hold enemy 

combatants indefinitely in secret prisons, with no external review or humanitarian 

oversight of any kind. Congress, or the courts, must step in to correct what appears 

to be a systematic violation of international law—and fundamental American values.

 2004 The Washington Post Company 

28


94891d.eps
29


94891e.eps
30


94891f.eps
31

Chairman HYDE. Mr. Chandler. 

Well, the question occurs on the motion to report the resolution 

H. Res. 699 adversely. I won’t waste time with a voice vote. We will 

go right to a rollcall. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Leach? 

[No Response.] 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Bereuter? 

Mr. BEREUTER. Aye. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Bereuter votes yes. Mr. Smith from New Jersey? 

Mr. SMITH OF NEW JERSEY. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Smith of New Jersey votes yes. Mr. Burton? 

Mr. BURTON. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Burton votes yes. Mr. Gallegly? 

[No Response.] 

Ms. RUSH. Ms. Ros-Lehtinen? 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Ms. Ros-Lehtinen votes yes. Mr. Ballenger? 

Mr. BALLENGER. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Ballenger votes yes. Mr. Rohrabacher? 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Rohrabacher votes yes. Mr. Royce? 

Mr. ROYCE. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Royce votes yes. Mr. King? 

Mr. KING. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. King votes yes. Mr. Chabot? 

Mr. CHABOT. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Chabot votes yes. Mr. Houghton? 

Mr. HOUGHTON. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Houghton votes yes. Mr. McHugh? 

[No Response.] 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Blunt? 

[No Response.] 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Tancredo? 

Mr. TANCREDO. Aye. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Tancredo votes yes. Mr. Paul? 

[No Response.] 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Smith of Michigan? 

Mr. SMITH OF MICHIGAN. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Smith of Michigan votes yes. Mr. Pitts? 

Mr. PITTS. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Pitts votes yes. Mr. Flake? 

Mr. FLAKE. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Flake votes yes. Mrs. Davis? 

[No Response.] 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Green? 

Mr. GREEN. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Green votes yes. Mr. Weller? 

Mr. WELLER. Aye. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Weller votes yes. Mr. Pence? 

[No Response.] 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. McCotter. 

Mr. MCCOTTER. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. McCotter votes yes. Ms. Harris? 

Ms. HARRIS. Yes. 

32

Ms. RUSH. Ms. Harris votes yes. Mr. Lantos? 

Mr. LANTOS. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Lantos votes no. Mr. Berman? 

Mr. BERMAN. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Berman votes no. Mr. Ackerman? 

Mr. ACKERMAN. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Ackerman votes no. Mr. Faleomavaega? 

[No Response.] 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Payne? 

[No Response.] 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Menendez? 

Mr. MENENDEZ. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Menendez votes no. Mr. Brown? 

[No Response.] 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Sherman? 

Mr. SHERMAN. How am I recorded? 

Ms. RUSH. You are not recorded. 

Mr. SHERMAN. Please record me as a no. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Sherman votes no. Mr. Wexler? 

Mr. WEXLER. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Wexler votes no? Mr. Engel? 

Mr. ENGEL. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Engel votes no. Mr. Delahunt? 

[No Response.] 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Meeks? 

Mr. MEEKS. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Meeks votes no. Ms. Lee? 

Ms. LEE. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Ms. Lee votes no. Mr. Crowley? 

Mr. CROWLEY. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Crowley votes no. Mr. Hoeffel? 

[No Response.] 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Blumenauer? 

Mr. BLUMENAUER. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Blumenauer votes no. Ms. Berkley? 

Ms. BERKLEY. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Ms. Berkley votes no. Mrs. Napolitano? 

Mrs. NAPOLITANO. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mrs. Napolitano votes no. Mr. Schiff? 

Mr. SCHIFF. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Schiff votes no. Ms. Watson? 

[No Response.] 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Smith of Washington? 

Mr. SMITH OF WASHINGTON. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Smith of Washington votes no. Ms. McCollum? 

Ms. MCCOLLUM. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Ms. McCollum votes no. Mr. Chandler? 

Mr. CHANDLER. No. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Chandler votes not. Chairman Hyde? 

Chairman HYDE. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Chairman Hyde votes yes. 

Chairman HYDE. Mr. McHugh? 

Mr. MCHUGH. How am I recorded? 

Ms. RUSH. You are not recorded. 

33

Mr. MCHUGH. Aye. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. McHugh votes yes. 

Chairman HYDE. Mr. Pence? 

Mr. PENCE. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Pence votes yes. 

Chairman HYDE. Mr. Gallegly? 

Mr. GALLEGLY. Aye. 

Ms. RUSH. Mr. Gallegly votes yes. 

Chairman HYDE. Mrs. Davis? 

Mrs. JO ANN DAVIS OF VIRGINIA. How am I recorded? 

Ms. RUSH. You are not recorded. 

Mr. JO ANN DAVIS OF VIRGINIA. Yes. 

Ms. RUSH. Mrs. Davis votes yes. 

Chairman HYDE. Clerk will report on this vote. 

Ms. RUSH. There are 23 ayes and 17 noes. 

Chairman HYDE. And the ayes have it, and the motion to report 

adversely— Mr. Hoeffel? 

Mr. HOEFFEL. No vote. 

Chairman HYDE. And Mr. Delahunt? 

Mr. DELAHUNT. No. 

Chairman HYDE. Would you give me the count again? 

Ms. RUSH. 23 ayes and 19 noes. 

Chairman HYDE. And the ayes have it, and the motion to report 

adversely is adopted, and the Committee is adjourned with the 

thanks of the Chair. 

[Whereupon, at 5:15 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

(35)

A P P E N D I X 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING RECORD

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE NICK SMITH, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MICHIGAN

Today we are considering a resolution that would require the State Department 

to turn over documents to Congress concerning Abu Ghraib. This approach does not 

take proper account of how we got here today. All the reports about what happened 

there come from military investigations and the report of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). Seven soldiers have been charged under military 

justice, and one has pleaded guilty. Today, there are ongoing criminal military investigations involving abuses at Abu Ghraib. There are 6 major investigations, including one that asks whether these investigations are adequate. This administration is clearly responding and this Congress should start by examining the results 

of ongoing investigations instead of passing partisan resolutions sponsored only by 

Democrats. The resolution that we are considering today does not contribute to the 

proper oversight we all want. 

The resolution is over-reaching and would require more documents than appropriate to be released. Many documents have already been released. The Secretary 

of Defense has committed to providing a large number of documents. The Taguba 

report is available to the Committee. The ICRC is providing its report to the Committee. There have been numerous briefings and six hearings. Congress is clearly 

engaged on this issue in a bipartisan way. 

As a former Intelligence officer, I suggest Mr. Chairman that in a war environment it is difficult to know the best way to interrogate prisoners who know of past 

and future planning to kill our soldiers. In Abu Ghraib soldiers violated procedure 

and apparently committed crimes on their own. The detainees were not being interrogated. Another soldier realized that what was happening was wrong, reported it, 

and now we have plenty of investigations. The administration has responded admirably. This resolution would serve little purpose beyond turning a simple but offensive criminal matter in Iraq into a political matter in Washington. I urge my colleagues to report this resolution adversely. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE DIANE WATSON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Mr. Chairman, it goes without saying that every member of this Committee was 

shocked, saddened, and outraged by the graphic reports of the abuse of prisoners 

in Iraq and Afghanistan in early May of this year. However, in the intervening two 

months only the Senate Armed Services Committee had embarked on any kind of 

sustained inquiry of the prison scandal. The House has remained mum on the subject. In fact, I recall that Majority Leader De Lay’s most sustained response to the 

scandal was to admonish Republican members to tone down their criticism. 

The House of Representatives has been derelict in its duties and responsibilities 

to investigate this matter and, Mr. Chairman, I submit that the position of the Republican leadership is simply unacceptable. The grotesque images have been broadcast and rebroadcast to the world and have seriously undermined the ability of this 

nation to promote human rights around the world. Moreover, the images have directly undermined our ability to credibly demand that U.S. prisoners be treated humanely. The events have further contributed to our nation’s lack of respect and 

standing not only in the Middle East, but even among our European allies. 

Mr. Chairman, it is my suspicion—and I suspect it is the suspicion of many of 

those who will vote against this resolution of inquiry—that the Iraq prison scandal 

36

was not just the work of a few ‘‘bad apples’’ among the lower ranks of our military. 

We have learned that the ICRC and other NGOs had issued credible warnings about 

widespread prisoner abuses well before the scandal broke. We have also learned 

that the White House’s Chief Counsel drafted a memorandum to justify the use of 

torture in certain instances. While the White House now disavows the memorandum, it nonetheless is indicative of a certain mind set at the highest levels of 

government. 

If we are to regain our nation’s respect in the court of world opinion, it is necessary for this body to undertake a complete, thorough inquiry of this matter. I hope 

that all members will step up to their constitutional responsibilities and vote 

against the Chairman’s motion to report the resolution unfavorably.

Æ