Cameraman: Okay, we're rolling. Peter: Okay, good morning. - Good morning Peter. - We are very grateful to you for participating in the Witness to Guantanamo Project today. We invite you to speak of your experiences and involvement with issues of Guantanamo. We are hoping to provide you with an opportunity to tell your story in your own words. We are creating an archive of stories, so that people in America and around the world will have a better opportunity to understand what happened. And hopefully your experiences will contribute to that. Future generations must know what happened in Guantanamo and the impact of Guantanamo internationally. And by telling your story you contributing to history. We are very grateful for your coming today to speak to us and your willingness to tell us your story. At any time you'd like to take a break, please let us know. And if you do say something that you'd like us to review we can certainly remove it or review it. And we'd like to begin by asking you your name and your age and date of birth, and some background about yourself. - So I'm Nicholas Henin in French you would say Nicola Inno. So as you can get from my accent, I'm obviously French. I'm just about to turn 40. I was born on the 7th of November, 1975 and I am a freelance journalist. I started journalism in 99 so a bit over 15 years now. Peter: And your education? - And I have a master in history and international relations. This master, I met it in Cairo, and it was about the international relations in the Middle East. And I specialized very early on in the Middle East because I started to travel in the region. As soon as I turned 18, as soon as I was allowed to go for vacations without my family, I just bought a plane a very cheap plane ticket and I traveled actually to Syria. And so this is where and how I discovered the region and very early as well as I was still a student in literature, I started selling journalism pieces, I mean on a freelance basis to papers, to French papers. After this master of history, I started journalism in Paris. Peter: And did you work independently throughout these 15 years? - I started in a small press agency in Paris for three years. And by the end, by summer actually of 2002, I saw coming an American invasion of Iraq and I decided, okay I have to be there because this is a history making. And then I left my job and I concentrated all my time. I focused on trying to get the Iraqi visa which was extremely difficult to get at that time. And even though I wasn't a staff reporter for any paper I got one just because for two months I only lobbied and looked for a way to get this Iraqi visa while any staff reporter, okay, will have a nice visit card, but well didn't have so much amount of time to spend just for visa. So I arrived among the very first in November, 2002 in Baghdad with a visa valid for two weeks. And I decided to overstay until the American released me. And this is actually the funny part of the story. I was probably the only one truly released basis in American invasion because the Iraqi people were nothing but released were not racist at all. But myself, yes, I would have been put to jail if they would have found me with such a long overstate. Peter: The Iraqis would have put-- - No the Iraqis, So I could not leave the country because I could not cross any border with the entry stamp pens visa that I had in my passport. Peter: How long did you stay in Iraq that time? - Well, until after almost six months. Peter: And do you speak other languages besides French and English? - I speak some Arabic, but little. I lost a lot of it and I speak German. - {peter] Huh. And so after you left Iraq, what happened then back in 03? - I came back to France for some time and then I went back to Iraq and I was correspondent in Baghdad for two years for actually, well, anyone wanted to hire me but I ended as a correspondent for the French public radio, Radio France, which well took most of my time. And that was virtually a full-time job. And so at that time, I was mostly working for Radio France and for the Newsmakers in LaPointe Peter: Can you take us up to the time you were-- - I studied in Iraq for some time afterwards when Iraq became too dangerous, I moved to Jordan, afterwards I kept moving bu I met my wife, with my wife so that was a bit of a personal story in that. And when the Arab spring started I covered it, of course intensively. Peter: In different countries? - Yeah, in all of the countries except for Tunisia that I missed and I would have loved to cover it but wow, I had no chance. And I was actually the first TV reporter to enter Syria illegally after the beginning of the revolution, as early as September of 2011 I crossed the Syrian border with middlers from Turkey. And I went down to homes. So I crossed a big part of Syria and I kept covering this revolution that ended up in the civil war, as it developed and during my fifth trip that was in June, 2013, I went to Raca, Raca is a city in Eastern Syria. That is now one of the two defacto capital towns, capital cities of the Islamic state. And at that time Raca just fell. I mean, the Syrian regime lost its grip and on Raca. It was bitten by coalition of Jihadi groups. The Islamic state did not exist at that time. It was Jabhat al-Nusra and there were some competing groups, must have been Islamic that took the control of the city. And that was the first, because Syria is a federal state. That was the first federal capital city to be lost by the Syrian regime. And I wanted to see, because to administrate a countryside is not that difficult because people will always find a way to cope while they can rely much more on the local resources, but to administrative city that's a different story. And I wanted to see how rebels were administrating a large city after they take control of it. And that was the first aim of this report, after 10 days, I was abducted. Peter: At that point ISIS still didn't exist when you were abducted. - Actually on the morning of my abduction I read the news and the internet that Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi so the self-proclaimed Calif of the Islamic state told Ayman Al-Zawahiri of Al Qaeda to go to hell. So he told him I have basically, well, it just summarizes the message, but it was like, I go on my own. I'm fed up with you. So that was actually, I was abducted on the day of the divorce pretty much. And so on the day the Islamic state was started to exist definitively as an independent entity. Peter: Before we go into the abduction did you know that could happen, that you were people abducted before you, were you afraid at all? Were you aware? - Very few cases were public because that was a problem with this abductions. Many of the cases were kept under blackout, the only cases I heard of were for James Folly and for my two fellow French journalist, Anza had been taken in a region where there were a lot of small groups competing with a lot of math. Yes. So I would thinking that they had been taken just by small rogue groups only looking for money and with no political agenda. And that was actually my mistake. My first mistake was to ignore that there could have been some other objections that were kept secret. And to believe that the Jihadi rebels, that the Jihadi groups in Syria had only a political agenda and focused on the regime and that's especially in the west because I met some Jihadists including Alipo a year before. And I mean I'm not going to say that they were friendly to me, but they were like, okay we don't want to deal with Western press. While other rebel groups were very keen at embedding us and taking us with them to report on and to make reports with them and on them. Peter: So you felt safe at that point? - Yes. Pretty much. Peter: Were you alone? - I left alone and while in Iraq I met another friend journalist and photographer named Pietto Res and we became friends and he was taken a few hours after me. Peter: And so maybe you could describe how you were abducted, how that happened. - Well, you don't need any imagination or just go to your imagination. What does an abduction look like? It's just like in a movie, there's a car that breaks, stops right in front of you in the street, in the middle of the city and guys with their face covered under baklavas and with the Kalashnikov, jump on you, grab you, take you, poof, 10 seconds you're done. Peter: You had no 401 and you were just in the street? - No, nothing. Peter: And did they say who they were? - Just bullshit. They never said their name. Peter: And they did anything when they abducted you or they just grabbed you? - No. Peter: So what were you thinking? - I was thinking like that It was, yeah, it was gangsters. I realized they were gangsters at the first second. It just took me few days to realize that there were a Islamic state. And then I realized that Islamic state were gangsters. Peter: And how did you realize they were Islamic state? They tell you? - Yeah. After I ran away, I just escaped on the third day and I broke the bars of my cell and I ran in the desert for the night and they took me back very already in the morning. And they took me back to the same place and then they punished me a bit and they told me during the punishments that they were Mujahideen as the Islamic state. Peter: When you escaped did you know, were you still in the same town? - Yeah. No, it was in a prison but between Mojis desert. Peter: And did you know where you were when you were running away? Did you know the area. - Not much. Peter: And they went looking for you or they just happened to find you? Did they go looking for you? - No, they were just lucky. I thought I had been taken by a small group and that the core of the Islamic groups running the city were still harnessed. And I even thought that I had to go to the headquarters of the group in Raca and to say hello, dressed I would like to notice, but some rogue elements of your groups did that to me. And that's really bad. And I would like you to punish them. Yeah, it's laughable now. Peter: So then could you tell us what happened after they recaptured you and then-- - I don't want to go into details. Peter: In terms of how you. - After a couple of weeks, I was moved along with Pierra that I didn't know until then, that he had been taken too. I was moved to Alepo and there I met with many other hostages in the course of the summer of 2013, then I met people like David Haynes had been murdered, Jon, the two other French journalist. I also met with Daniel Ray, Danish photographer who has been released afterwards. I also met with James Foley and John Candy and we are put altogether in the same jail from this point. And two days after Steven Sotloff is abducted he joins our set as well. Peter: And everyone at that point understood ISIS was in control. - Yeah, it wasn't clear yet to which extent it was ISIS or the international, some subgroups of Jabhat al-Nusra. So the Al-Qaeda affiliate. So for us, we were somehow in the hands of Al Qaeda and we realized that it was even worse than that. Peter: And the reason why we're interviewing you is because of the connection to Guantanamo. So when did you start feeling like there was a connection? - Actually, there was among the jailers, our jailers. Some people, you have to understand that this is still an ongoing story. They are still at the time of where we are recording this interview. They are still holding one hostage I know of namely John Cantlie and apparently some others I didn't meet, but well so it's difficult for me to go deep into details of the jailers or because I don't want to jeopardize of course. And I think that is still ongoing but I think I can still tell you, is that among my jailers there was someone that was later nicknamed Jihad John and he with others had in mind to somehow marrow Guantanamo. He's aim was to take revenge of Guantanamo by doing exactly the same thing. So grabbing more or less innocent people were killed and then let them pay the price for what their government has done. So this is what was insane. And when I got the connection with you through Murad Bencherali, was a French former detainee of Guantanamo. And it happened some, I think just some weeks after my release that I heard his story from his mouth. And I realized this is crazy because what we both of us experienced are the two ends of the very same crazy machine. And we have been taken out of the normal world by people, by mad people who want to take revenge on something but aren't the bad people and in a bad way. So just as well, Guantanamo has been made to take revenge on 911, this abduction enterprise I was part of along with the two dozens of Western hostages, was made to take revenge on the war on terror and the Western intervention in the middle east. I want to stress as I'm talking about that of course we do not have to believe this because just like for Guantanamo, this is just a pretext. I mean, when Jihadi John appears on camera with James folly, kneeling down in the Syrian desert and Jihadi John says something like, "Obama remove your troops and stop intervening in Syria "or I killed him" or threatened to kill the next one. I mean, he knows very well the result of this movie, he knows very well, that this murder will conduct to even more Western or American intervention in this conflict. And even more strikes. What he wants really truly is deeper intervention and escalation is a conflict. So when these people pretend that they're taking revenge and that they want, on the Western intervention and as they want it stop, they are just lying, what they want an Armageddon. They just want a no end escalation of the conflict because they believe in a clash of civilizations. Peter: How do you know that? - Through their literature and through the references to especially the Hadith, the verses in the Sunnah is that is about the Town of Debek because they believe that the battle of the end of the world would happen in Syria. And will confront very large coalition of Western armies against a very large coalition with Muslims coming from all over world. And this is precisely what is happening. And this is something that, is that the game that we Westerners are playing which is totally insane because we are shooting in our foot. Peter: So did you know that at that time that he expressed that to you or this is how you observed it later? - They put us after some time and what they wanted to be a model prison. So with CCTVs, with uniforms, orange uniforms, with identity numbers written on the orange jumpsuit. And this is basically where the only time when they feed us properly, because they were model, they wanted to show to us that they were the official jail administration off the Islamic state. They wanted to play state like. Peter: And did they say to you you're wearing an orange jumpsuit because this is Guantanamo? Or do they say? - Yes. Peter: And they did they say to you essentially this is revenge for Guantanamo. Is that how they explained it to you? - They told us things like, well, you are guilty because you either journalists or hard workers are on the frontline of the war of terror of the clash of civilization, because you are the people shaping the public opinion of your country. So yes, you're telling us that you are not responsible for the duties of your government, but you as a people who shaped the public opinion that elected is this government that did that. So you are even more responsible that actual fighters with weapons. So you especially deserve punishment. And the many references to drone wars. So the drone strikes, especially in Yemen they were very much influenced by Anua Aulaki. So this American origin Jihadi was killed by a drone strike in Yemen. And they were also very much inspired by the Iraqi insurgency. And I came to the conclusion that the Islamic state is the result of an intervention on one hand and a non intervention on the other. It's a result of the American invasion of Iraq. That was the source of Al-Qaeda in Iraq because Al-Qaeda was not in Iraq before the invasion as everyone knows in the US and the abandon of the Syrians after the start the revolution because they received no help, no support, because there was no intervention in Syria. And this is what is crazy by the way with international politics. Especially when you look at the issue of, as the chemical weapons because basically Iraq was invaded after false acquisitions of having chemical weapons but where chemical weapons are being used on the face of the world. And with everyone's knowledge nothing happened, when the intervention would have been for the sake of the people and not for the sake of some imperialism, then there is nothing. These two fundamental to the very same extent are the origins of the Islamic state and contributed to the Islamic state was at a very similar level. And this is, I mean, some people sometime criticize me and tell me, oh you're just like another crusader, you wanted a Westwind Vitoria, no way, or you wanted, in Iraq it was good to intervene. I mean, you can say the same intervention is done. Non intervention is because I believe to the same level. And that it was the same logic that creates intervention. And the non intervention are the same result and produce the same cost. Peter: Did you understand that when you were a hostage? - It was a good point during this captivity is that I had a lot of time to think. And yes, and by the way this reflections as a basis of a book I have written after wars, which is not a book about my time in captivity, but book about, well that's a reflection on the region in general and on the causes for the rise of this Islamic state and particular and this book by the way will be released in English this fall, this winter. Peter: And did you have this conversation with any of your captors. - Very little, because they were close to that then it's just like, oh how do you call someone who believes in plots, completist? Lady: Conspirator? - A conspiracist, yes. So Jihadis are like members of a sect or comparatorists. Peter: Conspirators or conspiracy theorists. - Yeah. They believe in conspiracies. That means that they live their vision of the world. What the German nicely call Velten Siobhan, is consistent it in itself. So they see a code and a reason for every action. There are logic, they are not crazy. They have a logic, they're consistent, but they just live in a model, in a world that is a bit parallel. It's very difficult to have a grip on them and to bring them to the real world and to explain to them that, no, they are not what they are. Their fight does not produce the effect that they pretend and that because most of them have good faith. I mean, they truly believe they are very genuine, they truly believe that they are in Syria to help the people and that they are fighting for the good and that all the rest is evil. I mean, they're not evil. I mean, the enemy is always stupid. He believes that he is the enemy while he is. (Narrator chuckles) I mean, if you want to understand a war you have to just imagine what your enemy think. And we believe that Islamic state is the evil. Peter: Right? - As they believe that the rest of the world is. So it's very difficult to have to have a discussion on this issues with them, because was very arithmetic to logical arguments. Peter: So the fact that you were French, if they come, they thought of Guantanamo since you a French, why would they tie you into Guantanamo with the Americans? - Well, France was not a part of the Iraqi invasion but it's still part of the war on terror as French president at that time, Jacques Chirac was the first head of state to go to New York after 911, for instance, to bring support and to witness support to the American people. So we are still on eyes. They see it obviously and therefore we are common enemies to them. So, but what helped us, because some people in our group of hostages have been extremely badly treated. I don't want to go with details and names especially because some have been killed. And I don't want to add pain to the pain of the loss to their relatives. And some had been relieved. And it's up to them to talk about what's happened through, but yes, some of us in the group have been through actual torture and sometime in a very intense way, we the French have probably been relatively protected because most of our endeavors were very much inspired by the Iraqian Surgency. So that was better protection on the French somehow even though, I mean, it was extremely relative but there was not the same amount of animosity towards us than towards as especially the American and the British. Peter: So they did make a distinction. - On a marginal level. Yes. Peter: You might not wanna answer this and that's fine, but-- - I mean, we were their enemy, but not their arch enemies. Peter: Right. And they, so they were sophisticated enough to make that distinction. - Definitely, is that extremely politicized. I mean, a conspiracionist will spend his nights on his computer reading. I mean, news, well, this kind of we call it in French re-information. I don't know if it makes any meaning in English or for an American viewer but it's, re-information in France is a theory that says that what is in the mainstream media is crap is based voluntarily by journalists who have under any pressure usually because of foreign stare, sometimes US or Israel or as the Gulf states or whatever and that they have to deliver the real message. You have the same thing, of course in the US, people who believe in corporations conspiracies will be extremely politicized in a wrong way with a wrong vision. But it is typically someone who reads a lot and informing himself a lot on the world affairs. Peter: When you mentioned Israel did they bring Israel up in these conversations? - A bit, but yeah, a bit, but not as much as the US especially and well, the US and the UK and say, we're definitely their arch enemies mostly because some of the shallows were British nationals and had a very specific animosity towards Britain. And also because of, yeah, their relationship with Iraqi insurgency, which was yeah. Targeted specifically as Americans Peter: When they, and I know you don't wanna describe it and we don't need to hear it but when they did harsh treatment or torture of people did they ever say we're doing this particular thing because it's what Guantanamo does. - I will tell about waterboarding. Few of my former cellmates have been waterboarded. And this was when they did that they did that because of Guantanamo. And they spoke of Guantanamo. I cannot go into details because no one was waterboarded at the time I was, well, at the time we were sharing a cell so it was mostly before and apparently a bit after my release for some of my cellmates I left behind. And that was specifically admirer of Guantanamo. This is what they wanted to do. Say they wanted to marrow Guantanamo to say to take revenge. And what is amazing is that they marrowed it so well is that even marrowed it's mistake namely doing bad things to the wrong people because as you must have seen since you started your project many of Guantanamo's inmates were innocent. Just like, I believe that no one in my group of hostages deserve to be there. And as the opposite in this group we all decided to go to Syria. None of us was making good money going into Syria. None of us, it's not for, we didn't go to Syria to make glory or to make a fortune. We have been to Syria because either being hard workers or journalists we had some experience, some knowledge of the region and a lot of sympathy for the people in the region. And we did like what I still do by the way. But we weren't, I mean someone who is a racist or an Islamophobe, we did not go to Syria to report on the insurgency, on the revolution or to help the local population. And if someone would actually no one deserves to be taken hostage but if someone would deserve to be taken hostage it would rather be this kind of people racist or Islamophobic. I mean, if they pretend to fight racism or Islamophobia because this is one of their main argument to enlist new people, to come to and fight in Syria but they actually favored them. Islamophobia and jihadism are the two faces of the same coin. So its just like two rats running and running in a cage. And they need them both to feed to move and to fill it. So, because the more Islamophobia you have in the west, the more Jihadist will be able to convince young Muslims, oh, you're marginalized. You are not welcoming in your society. Come we can provide you with a nice environment to live your life as a Muslim. And the other way the more you have a violence and war and extremism the more it will fuel Islamophobia in our countries. So they need them and we cannot fight only one. If we want to fight one, we have to, well to consider both and to face them both parallel, we have to tackle them in the same move. Peter: I wanna go back to that but I just want to ask you before I forget did they also say that aids work is also in the forefront in terms of sending their message even though they were there to help the people? - Yes, because, and by the way it's not totally wrong. I mean, it's not only out of humanitarian concern that a government will decide to fund an aid program. I mean, USAID or equivalent government bodies in other countries are part of soft power what is called soft power. So to that extent, there are not totally wrong because yes, when you deliver aid to a country, it's not only out of humanitarian concerns it's also part of your political influence worldwide. But as this being said, it's totally insane. Of course. And I want to strengthen that to believe that an individual, a humanitarian aid worker is an agent of influence when he goes to a country on assignment, for an NGO to help at the individual level it is purely a humanitarian concern. It does not see himself as someone bringing a message from a government, of course. Peter: And why did they wanna engage you in conversation and educate you and perhaps get you to convert to the message. - We had limited, well, only limited exchanges with them. They did not specifically tried to convert to Islam to make us convert to Islam and for some, well for those of us who did convert, especially in the hierarchy of the Islamic state were a bit more disturbed by this conversion because it's even less, it's even more difficult to justify what they were doing on us since, well, some of us were Muslims but this only enlightens the little care that these people have of their own religion, it just like we had in the last days a visit of the pope, the Catholic Pope in the US and actually, well, most of the people in the Bible belt will disagree with the Pope's messages because many people in the Bible belt while to may view at least betray the message of the Christ. Peter: When you spoke to the other people who were hostage with you did others have the same insights you did in terms of understanding this bigger picture? - A lot, yes. We had, yes, extensive discussions about our vision of the world. And we were pretty much all of us on the same line. Peter: In the Guantanamo issue too did they seem like you did? - Yes. Actually the Guantanamo issue I did not witness it myself much. It was witnessed especially by some of my cellmates who experienced more with some of the jailers who had this in mind very much. So I mostly heard it from them. I experienced it when I, sorry. I experienced it when mostly through some of the discussions about the war on terror and Guantanamo. And when they put us in orange jumpsuits. Peter: How long were you in an orange jumpsuit? - Couple of months. Peter: You wore an orange jumpsuit for a couple of months. - Yes. And we had some infection problem that caused them to sterilize us and it just had to burn our angina series because they were all contaminated. Peter: And do you know where they got those orange jumpsuits? - Oh, they made them locally. At a local retailer obviously. Peter: And when they gave you the orange jumpsuits you make the connection to Guantanamo did they say you're wearing them because detainees wear them? - Yes. Peter: Did you hear them say that? - Yes, it was not only implicit that this orange jumpsuits were related to Guantanamo. They told us you are in now in the model prison off the Islamic state, because we are a state. And because you are like, it's a high-value detainees. Peter: If Guantanamo didn't exist do you think you've had a different experience? - Definitely. And more widely if the war on terror wouldn't have happened the experience would have been a total different especially when it comes to waterboarding because waterboarding was something extremely specific. I mean, the Islamic state is a fusion of two cultures. And you can see it very well when you look at their propaganda movies. In their propaganda movies, you have references to Islamic series, popular Islamic series that are produced by Arab TVs, archery, horses, fire, flags, or flames. Swirled, all these are things that you will that are very high in the popularized limits areas. And you have references to horror movies or our video games in terms of imagery, clothes, and so on and visual codes. So, because this group as a fusion is a result of the fusion between two populations that had originally nothing to do together which are namely rural people from the Euphrates valley. So you know the people wearing Jalabiya Kofia was a burden to them so the peasants and rebels from around neighborhoods the baggy pants and the cat and watched "Arthur" series and played the same video games our kids are playing and the same series our kids are watching. So these two very different population met there. And this is what is crazy is that they succeeded to merge these two population. And it is exactly the same, this fusion you can also notice it in the weather torture because part of the torture, I spoke with some people specialized in who deal with people who found assimilation in France but were chartered in our country and they provide psychological help to these refugees who were tortured at home. And this psychologist told me that there is a school of torturing. There is a manner to torture in every country and actually in the jails of the Islamic state the way the tortured was a mix of Syrian regime and war on terror because you had in the group people who experienced themselves this torture from these two periods. Peter: They experienced themselves you mean they were tortured by Americans? - Yes. And or by Syrians. Peter: Did you actually meet someone who was tortured by Americans? Peter: One of my jailer told me, I think it is bullshit but he still told us I, he was Tunisian or is Tunisian. I don't know if he's still alive. He told me, I spent, I think, four years in Guantanamo. Peter: One of your jailers told you that? - Yes. Peter: Do you know his name? - No, not even his known hair. The only thing I know is that he was Tunisian and I never saw his face but I would say in his maximum mid 30s. Peter: You never saw his face. You mean your jailers always kept their face hidden from you? - Almost always. Yes. Except for the very low ranking or sometime, normally yes. Peter: A couple of things, I don't know if they knew, I don't know if you knew, but it's not clear that waterboarding happened in Guantanamo. If it did happen by the CIA in a separate building down there and that hasn't been documented completely. Although some people believe that's what's true about the CIA but it was totally separate from the military running Guantanamo. - Yeah, this is why said I separated myself Guantanamo and the war on terror because Guantanamo is part of the war on terror. But the war on terror more widely is, well it's invasion of two countries. And well ways to kill that torture, basically where terrorism is something extremely specific. Because normally if you do something the success of your deed will be up to your ability to do it. Peter: Right. - But with terrorism, it's not the success of a terrorist act is not up to the terrorist. It is up to the victim. A successful terrorist act is an act to which the victim will react in the manner the terrorist wanted. So it is the victim of the act who will complete the success of the attack. So basically, the best example to that is 911. You have to be stupid to believe that you punished Al-Qaeda by invading Afghanistan and Iraq. No, the real success of 911 was not the destruction of the twin towers. It was the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq and it was Bin Laden who did that, but the victim of Bin Laden. And this is what is extremely specific with terrorism. And this is something we have to learn. And this is a message we shall propagate because most of the time when we pretend that we fight terrorism we actually feel it. Peter: And that's what you were saying that you said the ISIS people you met clearly wanted the armageddon that was their goal? - I don't remember for sure that I heard this while in captivity but this is what after my release, I extensively read Jihadist literature. And especially I read their online magazine, "The Big," and it's extremely clear in this magazine. They even made a special issue on that. One of their very first issues of "The Big" was on the judgment day and the battle beforehand. Peter: So if Guantanamo didn't exist things might feel different and perhaps even better than-- - Definitely. Definitely. I mean, Guantanamo was one of the most efficient recruiting tool for Jihadis after 911. Peter: You believe that? - Definately, I mean not only me and myself, I have more like a humanitarian or a human rights perspective but even, I mean even security or a intelligence express will tell you that, even the military will tell you that, even people in the other side I'm not a fighter myself, but even fighters, even people who are engaged with violence. A good fighter is someone who knows how to restrain his use of force, to optimize it. Peter: Was the CIA mentioned and MI5 while you were captive? - Yeah. Mostly to justify our capture pretending that we were intelligence people. It was just bullshit. Peter: Do you think they knew that was not true? They just made it up or you think they might've thought that. - I don't know. These people live in such a parallel world that I don't know if they were believing their bullshit or not. It's difficult to assess if they lie to you because just want to lie to you or if they truly believes their lies. Peter: And there's something called extraordinary rendition. Did they bring that up at all? - I knew, what was this of course, but wait, I don't remember if they did bring it up, but once again from what I've read of their propaganda literature, it's very important to them. And it has been as well a powerful recruitment tool. Peter: The way you describe it and I think that's important for history. Is that Guantanamo still the lightening. - Yes. Peter: But that is really more than anything else what drove that tension no matter what Guantanamo really is. - Yes. Peter: And in Guantanamo there was a lot of, there was quite a bit of isolation and actually Guantanamo detainees we interviewed describe Guantanamo as a psychological prison than just physical abuse. A lot of physical abuse occurred prior to people being sent to Guantanamo. Was that understood by these people and did they talk in terms of, or did they take you in terms of isolation or psychological abuse? - Actually, to take someone hostage is per se a psychological abuse. And they were very good at that. Especially as they were playing about the timeframe it happened a few times that they told us you will be released tomorrow. And it happened at least four or five times, including two or three times very seriously. And making us pack. Peter: Really? - Yes. Peter: Did they ever tell you afterwards that-- - But on the other hand then two weeks later the very same guys would come and say, "You will never leave. "You will die here "because your government doesn't care about you. "So you will die because the world has forgotten you. "And you will stay here forever." Peter: I knew this side where they had you pack your bags as if you're leaving. Did they say that was a Guantanamo trick and we're doing the same thing, did they say that? - They even forced us to sing remake version of "Hotel California" that was badder than that. And that was Osama Lovely Otta. And it was about Guantanamo and it was saying you will never leave. Peter: And when they had you packed did they say later on that was a trick Guantanamo? - No. Peter: They just did that to you. And when they said the first time you're gonna leave the next day, did you believe it? - Of course you do. Peter: So do you think they refer-- - At the beginning you believe it, after it happens to you a couple of times, this is all about, it's all about the routine of being a hostage, the only way to survive as a hostage, even more than punctual physical abuse the biggest pain comes from the fact that you have no control on yourself, but very little control on yourself and no control at all about your future. You don't have any control or even knowledge about when you will be out or if ever you will be out or about the outcome of your captivity. And this the main source of pain I would say. Peter: So that's what detainees would tell us that the psychological torture is on some level worse than the physical. And is that when you would say too? - Yes. And even 'cause physical torture, how do you call the medicine to antidepressant? Peter: Anti-depressant. - Anti-depressant, okay. Or relaxing pill. Peter: Okay. Yeah. - Okay. If you come to me and tell me, okay, in a half an hour I will take you to a torture room and I'm going to torture you. But because I'm a nice guy, I'm here with two pills. I have a painkiller and I have a relaxing pill, anti-stress, anti-stress. You can take only one of them. Which one would you like? I would go for the second one. Peter: The relaxing pill? - Yes. Because you can always deal with the pain. It's not much a problem to deal with the pain. Everything is up there and you have to be flatline and to come back to your question about the psychological torture. It's all about being flatline. They tell you, we will kill you. Well, we will kill you tomorrow, you don't go down, if they tell you, we will release you tomorrow, you don't go high. You just a flatline, a routine, you enter a routine and you do not live it. And until you see the border and until you are actually released, but up to that point you just stay in this routine. So a flatline. Peter: So did you observe that in the other captives as well? Do they all react the same way you're describing? - Some of us needed some time to adopt, even myself of course. I mean, all of us needed some time to adapt, for some of us it came very fast. Some others needed more time but we eventually, well reach this level to calm down with our emotion and to adjust. Yeah relax and try to take events as they were going. And I think that this is pretty much what captives in Guantanamo walked on because there must be pretty much in the same as state of mind. Basically they have no foreseeable future. They can't know about their fate. And it's about the same, I would say. Peter: We interviewed some young detainees. I'm thinking of one in particular who was very forceful in fighting back and he felt that's what would keep him going. And he never became flatliner if you had the time which why I'm asking you, if you saw anybody who did just feel they had a fight back even if... - No Some of us were bad flatliners, (Narrator laughs) and I'm glad that Jen Cantley is extremely good at that. Peter: You think who's good at that? - Jen Cantley, as the last remaining hostage, is extremely strong and I'm very glad. Peter: Strong in being a flatliner you mean? - Yes. Peter: So you think that helped save you? - Yes. So what he's going currently still going through is totally insane, but I trust him to endure it and to yeah. To go straight with all of his trends. Peter: 'Cause he and you don't know and we can take some of this off camera but you don't know if he has company too so that he has some other people in support? - I don't know. I know of course, nothing, except for some very little bits that a few people believed after me, told me, I know of course nothing of what happened to my fellow cellmates after my release, at least up to the point some of them were murdered. Peter: Did ever meet Kayla Mula while you were there? - I met here once. Peter: While you were captive? - Yes. And the day before my release as they took her to our cell and she's spoke for a few minutes, just introduce herself. They apparently wanted us to deliver a proof of life for her. Peter: The day before you were released and you know the next day you are gonna be released? - Yes. They told us we would soon be released. Peter: And this time? - And this time there had been some released already. So we were starting to be a bit high and no longer that much flatline? Peter: Did they tell you'll never see your family again or they talked about your family at all? - Yes. Peter: Was that also deliberate as part of the psychological? - Yes. Yes, of course. They were very good at that, they even-- Peter: Go on I'm sorry. You were gonna say they even? - They even sent to my wife the picture of the first hostage they killed, that was in public. Peter: They send them to your wife? - By email, yes. Before my release. Peter: Did she know you were captive from the beginning? - Yes. She understood very soon. Peter: And they had your wife's email from you or? - Yes. Peter: They had told some people I know in CIA rendition sites and perhaps in Guantanamo that their wives were gonna be raped or in front of them or anything did stories like that, or? - No, of course, because it was not a credible, they had no access fortunately to our relatives which is not the case because in Guantanamo it's even worse because the CIA is potentially so powerful that you can imagine an abduction anywhere in the world. Peter: Right. - Thanks, God, ISIS cannot do that. Peter: ere they concerned about your children at all? Were they interested in your children? - They no pity, neither for the children or for anything else? They were just sticking to the line. You deserved that. But the psychological torture was also for the families, because I think that the pain of the relatives is even bigger than the pain of the captive when you're hostage, because the family does not know anything. The relatives of some of my former cellmates received very first prove of life of their son or brother only about something like a year after the capture, try to imagine that you just don't know, you don't know if he has been killed and buried or burned or is taken or the conditions you don't know. (static sound) than to experience firsthand. So, and this is definitely, I mean in this abduction enterprise the victims they were not only 2000s of victims. There were also the families because the pain of the parents, of my parents, of my wife, the pain of the relatives of all of my cellmates was probably higher than my own pain. Peter: Is something international that parents suffered torture when their children disappear. And I think that's what you're describing. Could you just tell us how did your wife hear about you being captured? - We had a security arrangement that was that I would contact her in a way or another. I had two satellite transmission device namely a sat phone and data antenna. So I was potentially reachable all the time. I didn't have to rely on the local infrastructure. And so I told her before living that I would try to contact her twice a day but at least once a day and that after 24 hours with no message from me she should contact the Franc Ministry, the crisis center. And I had a contingency plan with everything listed and the phone number and everything. So she calls them on the 25th hour. Peter: And they knew? - And they understood. She first called them and they just took the message. It was over the weekend. So they said, okay, thank you for the notice. And after that, she called the editor of the main paper I worked for. And he called someone high in the ministry. And they called her back and it became very soon, I think something serious. Peter: How would they know? - They just knew that considering the situation and considering that the fact was the transmission devices I had with me that it was something serious if I did not communicate and or answer calls or emails. Peter: When ISIS took you did they try to explain to you that they were different from the other rebel groups in Syria? Did they identify their part? - Yes. I had a bit of a discussion about that with a European Jihadi. And he told me is that because they are in competition with all the other groups they have no ally, no friend in Syria or Iraq. So even with Al-Qaeda or with the other Jihadi group named, Al-Hasham, they are competitors. So their position, while at least the position of this young European fighter is, was to say, he told me, "Well, we have struggled with them "but it's mostly at the level of the leaders. But most of the people who fight in these groups are good people except for the rebels. So the FSA, the Fritz in the army, they are just crooks and they are not mostly in them, blah, blah, blah, they are Kufar you know the story, but they had some respect I would say, at least at that time, at least when it comes to this discussion, had some respect for the fighters but for them, it was just a misleading leadership. Peter: When you were there, did they give you news? Were you informed of what was going on in the world at all? - Very low, we had, well, we had a two or three news from the rest of the world. We heard for instance, accidentally of the death of Nelson Mandela. And we heard that Francois Hollande had an affair and was taken in "People's Magazine" with a mistress. And that was hilarious. Well, that was the demonstration of their theory to them. Your societies are just thinking, well, it's just about fuck. (Narrator laughs) Your societies are totally corrupted. We know that and this is why we fight you, look at your president and they were jubilating about that, jubilating as you can say. Can we get a short break, please? Peter: Yes, let's take a short break absolutely. - Thank you. Lady: There is water right there. Peter: Before the break you mentioned Hollande and the affair. They were ridiculing Western society for that purpose. That made me think, did you ever, did they have any women in your presence at all at any time while you were there? - There were, I haven't seen any women in the group. I know they have, because especially many jihadists come travel to Syria and join ISSIS along with their family, I heard some women captives and I have seen few of them but of course it was just from far. Peter: But they didn't have women tempt you or to-- - Not at all Not at all. They still try to stick to some bases of Islam, including, well, especially this is a very strict reading of Islam that they're having that prohibits close contact between men and women when they're are not relatives. Peter: And another just a minute. Cameraman: Okay, we're rolling. Peter: Okay. One of the things that did happen in people captive by the US government was they were strip naked and sometimes kept that way or just kept in shorts in order to humiliate them. Did that happen to captives again, in reaction the same thing to show that they're like Guantanamo? - There has been very little of that, but I mean it was somehow conflicting, I think for them, because on one hand, this is, I mean, nudity is normal for us exceptional but extremely shocking for someone with an Arab or Muslim culture, this the a reason for the fury that's followed the release of the pictures of Abu Ghraib. I mean, if the pictures of Abu Ghraib would have shown torture with electricity or torture with beating that would have been normal for an Arab because this is what they are used to but nudity is something like it's the worst you inflict to someone. So this is why it was so shocking to them. And this is by the way, why I believe that some Americans have used it against some Guantanamo inmates because it's one of the most powerful ways they could humiliate them but on the other hand, so I think it was a bit conflicting to them because on one hand they wanted to revenge on that. But on the other hand it was so contradictory to their customs that they could not do that. So we had very little of that. Peter: Was Abu Ghraib mentioned at all by them? - Potentially not. I mean, amongst, we had a general some general preaches about all the capabilities of the West and all our guilts and Abu Ghraib was yes, probably in that, but it's already a bit old and I don't have memory of that exact quote. Peter: One of things that we were interested in is if from ISIS wanted you to understand that this is a reaction to Guantanamo, do you see that in their publicity other than the fact that the men who were behind it were on jumpsuits, did ISIS promote that image that Guantanamo informs the way they treat their captives? - I think that, yes, it has to do with what they called a model jail for VIP prisoners. So they had a whole speech around that that they say is they wanted us to be there high value detainees and that they would handle us as such. Peter: And they called you high value detainees? What that says to you and you understanding it. - Yes. Lou: Can I ask a more general question? Peter: Go ahead, Lou. Lou: In terms of their outreach materials, the symbol of Guantanamo or the imagery of Guantanamo is do you see it in their online outreach materials to recruit new members? - I don't remember any mention of Guantanamo in the Beacon, which is a main propaganda tour but I'm sure that they are, I would have to do some research on it. It's probably worth to research on that. Peter: And the model prison. I never heard of that model prison till you told us do you think that they promote that image outside or that's how they just presented it to you? - This is only where they presented it to us, they communicated very little about us because most of us were under blackout. So only, for most of my fellow cellmates were released. Our release was a discrete except for us because our government made a big case about us pertaining with the media. Our case we had quite a high profile. But for most of my former cellmates it was just like a short news in the media. Italian government announces as a release of one of its citizens, German government announces the release of one of its citizens. And that said if any and some of my former cellmates were released with no one knowing it. Peter: I mean, you probably don't wanna talk about it on camera but since Johnny mentioned it, do you know why you were released? - Why? Well, I'm not naive. I've been traded for something, I've been exchanged for something. The only thing that I, well, this I have to assume it because, well it's not because I was kind to them or I'm a nice smiles that eventually released me. The only thing I know for sure is what President Hollande told me when I came back, when we arrived in Paris, he told me France did not pay. Peter: He told you that? - Yes. So does it means that someone else did pay or that we have been exchanged for something that was not monetary? I don't know, but the only thing I know I do for sure is that the money if there were any money did not come from the government. I would like to elaborate a bit on this issue of share would negotiate for the release of hostages taken by a terrorist organization. I was myself, pretty much against any negotiation up to the very minute I'd been taken. So it's very easy. And one must be very careful taking any position. I believe a representative shall not make any statements to the camera before his son is taken hostage and such a serious issue. And one must be very careful about what is a public discourse as a public speech and what happens in reality, there is a trend to separate between two countries, two categories of countries, you have the country that pay and the countries that don't pay. So you'd have something like the US, the UK were very virtuous and resilient and we refused to deal and to make any concession to terrorist. And you would have on the other hand weak, all European countries who make concessions and eventually finds themselves in the position to fund terrorism. It's not like this in reality, what is the reality? Every time you have a hostage situation you will have an assessment made by his intelligence services and base administration with a cost benefit ratio and consideration. You will see, okay, what would it cost to us to give the hostage takers what they're asking for? What would be the consequences in the regions, local consequence for our allies for the difference in the, what differences would that do in the situation and at the opposite what would be the political cost of not negotiating and then there is an assessment for every single case. And as a result of that if you look at the last 12 months or so you can see that three Americans hostages, two American Hostages have been released after negotiations. Peter: Really? - Yes, namely Sergeant Bergdahl in Afghanistan, Tio Penos in Syria and a female Adi Walker in Nigeria. And in the same time you have had two or is that two or three, but several French hostages who have been killed by the abductors. So this is a perfect illustration that you have to go above the public discourse. Oh and the appearances that you have some countries negotiating and some others not negotiating. The reality is that you have a case by case assessment and sometime it is possible to negotiate. And sometime it is not. And sometimes there will be negotiations and sometimes I won't be any, and this is the reality. Peter: And can you give us some indicators on why some think it is more valuable to negotiate and why not? - I mean, some hostages have a higher profile. And sometime, I mean, at the time of my release IS was not seen as such a threat to the west. It was still seen as a local player for limited extent, if I was taken today or if I were still in their cells today my fate would probably be different because IS is not as willing to negotiate as it was at that time because France entered a coalition against them. And because the public opinion at the time of my release it was more important to have, the motto, "Bring our guys back, bring our guys home" was more important that the motto, "Well, make some concessions to this tourist." But nowadays, especially after what happened, the ETA events in January, 2015 in Paris and the attack on Charlie Hebdo Newspaper. Now, the public opinion has changed and would be very much against any negotiations with a group. So this is what I'm saying. It's case per case. It's every hostage situation has its own temporality and depends on mood as a result of a multifactor assessment and diverse country can take a very different decision at another time, points in the time. Peter: When you were released, had anybody been beheaded before you were released just to get a timeframe for the-- - When a hostage been killed. Peter: One had been killed? - Yes. - Did you know that while you were... - Yes, they told us it was not public, but they showed to us his picture and they sent it to some of our relatives by email, including my wife his name was Sergey, was a Russian citizen, his name was Sergey, he was a Russian citizen. And his case has been disclosed by I think an inquiry of news, the New York Times. Peter: So at that time he was the only one who had been killed? - Yes. - So the people who were killed after came after you were released? - Yes. I was released in May, in April and the-- Peter: James Folly? - James Folly, it was end of August. And the last one was Kayla Mula. Who's death was revealed I think last February was that, or March. Peter: I saw it was a different time. - Yes. - Will you go back to Syria? - I have a family prohibition. (Peter chuckles) Peter: If Obama stopped using drones or if Obama close Guantanamo, would that make a difference? Do you think? I'm very much a human rights oriented. So I believe that the drones war was to indiscriminate and therefore are contra predictive, but this being said I have had also opportunities to discuss with security people and peoples with experts in military issues. And I do believe that some limited use of drones but drone is still a weapon that can prove its efficiency, but it shall be limited. It shall be extremely limited. And the way it has been used so far especially in Yemen only contributed to the destruction of the Yemen State and afterwards as a country because the Yemeni States lost all credibility by allowing such killing campaign on its own soil. It's also very challenging for the both Pakistanians, Afghan governments. I would not say that drones should be eradicated from the weaponry, but the use which has been made especially by the CIA so far was a hugely counterproductive. Peter: And they made that clear to you as you told us? - It's more my assessment as a witness of the war of world affairs and after discussions with different war experts, I would say, on this field, looking at Guantanamo, it was only a mistake. Has no justification just like extraordinary renditions were known of very early, as early as 2004 or three even, you have the first papers in the press talking about them and revealing some details of these renditions. And this information have been used for the propaganda of these Jihadists. It's very difficult to tackle these issues because when you address and when you raise publicly the mistakes made by the West, in the war of terror or when you challenge the war on terror you will find many people in your own country saying that you work for the other side, which is totally crazy. I just aspire to a better world living in peace and security for everyone but security for everyone means also security for the Syrian people in their streets or the Yemeni people in their streets. Even when they have a drone flying above the head. Peter: If Guantanamo was closed if Obama actually closes the Guantanamo before he leaves office which doesn't seem likely, but if it did happen do you think that would make a difference to the crisis? - Yes. Peter: You do? - Long-term one, a long-term difference. Peter: What does that mean long-term difference? - It means if we weaken the propaganda. When you fight to rhythm most of the time if you fight it frontally it will be ineffective. Terrorism is like a swamp infested with frogs. So let's say you have a swamp full of frogs. One of the options is to take your gun, take hay boots, go to the swamp and shoot every single frog. It will take you a lot of time and you will have lots of bullets, a lot of effort, a lot of resources and you will have a swamp full of bullets at the end. And I'm not even sure let's guess. Can you tell me if you try you can succeed to kill every single in a swamp? So the other solution is to go at the source and dry up the swamp. So the best way let's say you have terrorism here, either you confront it directly currently and most of the time the bullets will go back at you. Or you're just circumvent it and dry it out. Especially on the, by drying out all of its propaganda arguments. And instead of that extraordinary rendition of war on terror, invasion of Iraq, invasion of Afghanistan, Guantanamo, all these are weapons of recruitment for them and we provided them to them. Peter: Lou, did you wanna follow up on something? Lou: No, just go ahead. Peter: Johnny Did you? Johnny: Go ahead, I think I'm good. Peter: So I think you just said it but as we close any advice or follow up that you'd like to share with the audience for the future and that I didn't or maybe I didn't ask you that you would just like to share? You kind of just said it, but if you want? - Yeah. I have a very important message to the world. Peter: Let's hear it. - In three words, read my book. (Panelists laughs) It would be Jihad Academy and it would be released in the States in January 16. Peter: January 16 - Yeah. Peter: In French is it coming out soon? - It came out last March already. Peter: Oh. - Already in France. Lou: And who's the publisher? - It's Bloomsbury in for the English version. And I going to launch the Arabic version end of October in Beirut and the English version in the UK, early November. Peter: Oh, and you'll tour. So yeah, we, we can-- - Its pretty much, what I told you during this interview, is developed in this book. So I would be very happy to send you a copy each. Peter: I would love to have her copy selling by you. - I hope that you come to San Francisco for that. Will definitely hold it. If you come we'll definitely hold something for you at the law school. - Cool. Peter: So nothing else, we will adorn. - Okay. We need 20 seconds of a room tone. Yes. Okay, go ahead. Cameraman: Okay, begin room tone. End room tone.