KSM cable C06718676

I (b)(1) Approved for Release: 2018/03/28 C06718676 (b)(3) CIAAct (b)(3) NatSecAct 200300 Date: (b )( 1) (b)(3) CIAAct (b )(3) NatSecAct TO: DIRECTOR FROM: SUBJECT: EYES ONLY - □ APRIL 2003 INTERROGATION OF KHALID SHAYKH MUHAMMAD (b)(1) (b)(3) CIAAct _____________________________________ BODY---------------------------------------(b)(3) NatSecAct I (b)(l) NatSecAct TOP :!!Cltl!!Y (b )( 1) (b)(3) CIAAct b)(3) NatSecAct c__ (b)(3) NatSecAct (b )( 1) (b)(3) CIAAct (b_)(_3_) N_a_ts_e_c_A_ct ___ ________ (b)( 1)___ (~)(~)~~;~~~~~;- ------1------------- -;~~~ -~~~ ------------~~ ~~~~ ~ ~~~~~~t- - - - - - - - - APR 03 (b)(1) If e e s (b)(3) CIAAct (b)(3) Nat~ecAct 13 e R 13 lf'---1__ __,!APR 03 STAFF (b)( 1) (b)(3) CIAAct (b)(3) NatSecAct TO: IMMEDIATEDIRECTOR. FoR: ----(b)(1)-----------l (b)(3) CIAAct _________ (b)(3) NatSecAct ~-- (b )( 1) SUBJECT: EYES ONLY - □ APRIL 2003 INTERROGATION OF KHALID SHAYKH(b)(3) CIAAct MUHAMMAD (b)(3) NatSecAct REF: A. 8· DIRECTo DIREcTo C ]b)(1) b)( 3 ) CIAAct b )(3) NatSecAct TEXT: 1. ACTION REQUIRED: 2. ATMOSPHERICS: NONE, FYI. (b )( 1) (b)(3) CIAAct (b )(3) NatSecAct A. ON □ APRIL 2003, ( (KHALID SHAYKH MUHAMMAD))(KSM) WAS INTERROGATED/DEBRIEFED BY HVT INTERROGATO ALEC SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS I (b)(1) I (b)(3) CIAAct (b )(3) NatSecAct Approved for Release: 2018/03/28 C06718676 (b)(3) CIAAct

Approved for Release: 2018/03/28 C06718676 B. KSM WASQUESTIONEDON INFORMATIONABOUTILYAS FERRIS, JOSE PADIA, AND THE HAMBALLIGROUP. 3. ENHANCEDMEASURES: NONE. (b )( 1) (b)(3) CIAAct (b )(3) NatSecAct D 4. ASSESSMENT: AS NOTEDIN THE APRIL REPORT, IN CONTRAST TO OUR INITIAL FORAY'S FROMINTERROGATIONAS WE TRANSITION TO DEBRIEFING, KSM'S PRODUCTIVITYHAS IMPROVED. HE ENGAGESIN DESIRED ATTENTIONTO DETAIL, UNSOLICITED CLARIFICATIONS, AND RELATIVELY UNGUARDED DIALOGUE. HE CONTINUESTO MAKEPROGRESSTOWARD A SATISFACTORYDEBRIEFING COMPORTMENT. A. NOTE: THE FOLLOWINGINTERACTIONBETWEENKSMAND HIS INTERROGATORIS INCLUDEDBECAUSEIT IS CONSIDEREDHELPFUL IN TERMSOF PROVIDING A "BEHAVIORALAND ATTITUDINALSLICE" OF HIS CURRENT INTERROGATIONSTATUS AND PROGRESS. FOLLOWINGHIS LAST DEBRIEFING SESSION TODAYKSMASKED THE HVTI INTERROGATOR IF HE (KSM) WASMAKING PROGRESSIN TERMS OF THE CONDITIONSHIS INTERROGATORS HAD DESCRIBED TO HIM WHICH.AREINDICATIVE OF PROGRESS. THE INTERROGATOR TOOK THIS OPPORTUNITYTO REINFORCE KSM'S CONDITIONINGBY REVIEWINGTHE INTERROGATIONRULES WHICHWERE INITIALLY GIVEN TO HIM AND HIS EXPECTEDBEHAVIOR. KSM WASREMINDED: 1. THE PURPOSEOF HIS INTERROGATIONIS NOT PUNISHMENTRATHERIT IS TO ELICIT INFORMATION, 2. INTERROGATIONIS BASED ON HARDJUSTICE BUT JUSTICE NONE THE LESS, 3. HE HAS CONTROLOF HIS TREATMENTIN THE SENSE THAT HE DETERMINES THE POSITIVE OR NEGATIVEDIRECTION THIS TREATMENT WILL TAKE BASED ON HIS BEHAVIOR, 4. INTERROGATORS WILL NOT USE GRATUITOUSVIOLENCE, TRICKERY, OR DECEPTIONAND THEY WILL DO PRECISELY WHATTHEY HAVETOLD HIM THEY WILL DO AND ENFORCEIMMEDIATECONSEQUENCES(POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE) BASED ON HIS COMPORTMENT AND PERCEIVED VERACITY, 5. HE WILL NOT BE PUNISHED FOR TELLING THE TRUTHEVEN WHENTHE TRUTH CONSISTS OF OPERATIONS, ASPIRATIONS, INTENTIONS, OR SENTIMENTSAGAINST THE US, 6. NO MATTERHOWMUCHPROGRESSHE HAS MADESHOULDHE CHOOSENOT TO BE HONESTOR PRODUCTIVEHIS STATUS WILL IMMEDIATELYREVERSEAND IF NOT CORRECTEDHE WILL FIND HIM SELF IN THE SAMEOR WORSECONDITIONSTHAN THOSE HE HAS EXPERIENCEDHERE TO FORE. KSMASSUREDTHE INTERROGATOR HE UNDERSTOOD THIS AND INTENDEDTO BE TRUTHFUL. AT THAT POINT KSM STATEDHE WAS CONCERNED ABOUTTHE INTERROGATORS JUDGMENTOF HIS PROGRESSAND ASK IF IT HAD IMPROVED(NOTE: IMMEDIATELYPRECEDINGKSMS ADMISSION TO THE KILLING OF DANIEL PEARL ON THEDOF APRIL HE HAD ASKED THE INTERROGATOR ABOUTHIS PROGRESSAND THE INTERROGATOR HAD REPLIED ON A SCALE OF 1-100, 1 BEING COMPLETELYDISHONESTAND 100 COMPLETELYHONEST, HE VACILLATEDBETWEEN50 AND 60. KSM WAS DISTRESSED AT THIS ASSESSMENTAND SHORTLYTHERE AFTER HAD DISCLOSED TO THE INTERROGATOR AND DEBRIEFER HIS COMPLICITY IN THE PEARL KILLING). KSM WASTOLD OVER THE PAST THREE DAYS HIS COMPORTMENT AND THE INFORMATIONHE HAD PROVIDEDWASSOMEWHAT IMPROVEDFROMTHE ESTIMATE GIVEN HIM EARLIER. AT THIS POINT THE INTERROGATOR EXPLAINED TO KSM THE INTERROGATIONAND DEBRIEFING PROCESS DESCRIBING EACH PHASE (INTERROGATION,TRANSITION, AND DEBRIEFING), KSM WASTOLD HE WAS CURRENTLYMAKINGPROGRESSACROSS THIS CONTINUUM BUT COULDIMMEDIATELY BE RETURNEDTO HIS INITIAL INTERROGATIONPHASE AT ANY TIME DEPENDING Approved for Release: 2018/03/28 C06718676 (b )( 1) (b)(3) CIAAct (b)(3) NatSecAct

Approved for Release: 2018/03/28 C06718676 ON HIS BEHAVIOR, DAMNINGINFORMATIONRECEIVED FROMINTELLIGENCE (b)(1) SOURCES, OR ADMISSIONS FROMOTHER DETAINEES. HE WASCAUTIONEDNEVER(b)(3) CIAAct TO BECOMECOMPLACENT AND IT WAS FURTHEREXPLAINEDTO HIM THAT EVEN (b )(3) NatSecAct DURINGTHE MONTHSOF DEBRIEFINGS WHICHARE TO FOLLOWTHIS SAME CONSEQUENCE WOULDBE ENFORCEDIF INDICATED. KSMAGAIN REITERATEDHIS INTENT TO TELL THE TRUTH. HE THEN ASKED IF IT WAS "TOO EARLY" TO ASK ABOUTWRITING A LETTER TO HIS FAMILY. THE INTERROGATOR TOLD HIM THl(b)(1) MAYNEVER BE A POSSIBILITY AND THAT IT WASTOO EARLYTO MAKESUCH 1(b)(3) CIAAct REQUEST. KSM CONTINUED, EXPRESSING CONCERNABOUT~------(b)(3) NatSecAct HE ASKED IF THE INTERROGATOR HAD ANY KNOWLEDGE OF ~------------~ THE INTERROGATOR REPLIED HE DID NOT KNOWTHIS INFORMATION.THE DIALOGUECONCLUDED WITH THE INTERROGATO~b)(1 ) ADMONISHINGKSM THAT HIS BEST COURSEOF ACTION WASTO WORK (b)(3) CIAAct EFFECTIVELY WITH HIS INTERROGATORS AND DEBRIEFERS TO TRUTHFULLY (b)(3) NatSecAct PROVIDE ALL THE INFORMATIONHE HAD. 5. PLANS: CONTINUETO DEBRIEF, DECONFLICTPREVIOUSLYPROVIDED INCONSISTENCIES, AND INTRODUCEADDITIONALDEBRIEFERS IN ORDERTO ASSESS HIS ADAPTABILITYAND WILLINGNESSTO SUSTAIN PRODUCTIVE BEHAVIORIN FUTUREDEBRIEFINGS. (b )( 1) CIAAct (b )(3) NatSecAct (b)(3) END OF MESSAGE TOl! .!!eft!J'l? Approved for Release: 2018/03/28 C06718676 (b)(1) (b)(3) CIAAct (b )(3) NatSecAct