Senate Intelligence Committee Chair Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) and Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz) and Carl Levin (D-Mich) today released two letters they sent to Acting CIA Director Michael Morell last month concerning the agency’s involvement with Zero Dark Thirty. Specifically, in the December 19 letter, the lawmakers want to know if “the filmmakers could have been misled by information they were provided by the CIA” in regards to the role torture played in getting information that lead to locating Osama bin Laden. This comes three weeks after the same senators wrote Sony Pictures’ Michael Lynton claiming the film was “grossly inaccurate” on the topic. It also comes one day after the committee said it would review CIA records of contact officials may have had with Zero Dark Thirty director Kathryn Bigelow and screenwriter Mark Boal. Here are the senators’ full letters, dated December 19 and December 31:
Mr. Michael Morell
Acting Director
Central Intelligence Agency
Dear Acting Director Morell,
We are writing to request information and documents related to the CIA’s cooperation with the makers of the film, Zero Dark Thirty. We are concerned by the film’s clear implication that information obtained during or after the use of the CIA’s coercive interrogation techniques played a critical role in locating Usama Bin Laden (UBL).
As you know, the film depicts CIA officers repeatedly torturing detainees. The film then credits CIA detainees subjected to coercive interrogation techniques as providing critical lead information on the courier that led to the UBL compound. While this information is incorrect, it is consistent with public statements made by former Director of the CIA Counterterrorism Center, Jose Rodriguez, and former CIA Director Michael Hayden.
The CIA cannot be held accountable for how the Agency and its activities are portrayed in film, but we are nonetheless concerned, given the CIA’s cooperation with the filmmakers and the narrative’s consistency with past public misstatements by former senior CIA officials, that the filmmakers could have been misled by information they were provided by the CIA.
In an unclassified letter you provided to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence on May 31, 2012, you wrote that the CIA engaged with the filmmakers “to ensure an appropriate portrayal of the Agency’s mission as well as the dedication of the men and women of the CIA who played a key part in the success of that mission.” The film opens with the words “based on first-hand accounts of actual events,” and according to now publicly released CIA records, the filmmakers met extensively with CIA personnel. Specifically, one publicly released email notes that the filmmakers met with you for forty minutes, during which you provided “substance again.” Another publicly released CIA email states that “As a [sic] Agency, we’ve been pretty forward-leaning with [the filmmaker], and he’s agreed to share scripts and details about the movie with us so we’re absolutely comfortable with what he will be showing.”Pursuant to the Committee’s recently-adopted Study of the CIA’s Detention and Interrogation program, Committee staff reviewed more than 6 million pages of CIA records. Based on that review, and with prior notification to the CIA, Chairman Dianne Feinstein and Senator Carl Levin released the following findings on April 30, 2012, regarding the UBL operation:
- The CIA did not first learn about the existence of the UBL courier from CIA detainees subjected to coercive interrogation techniques. Nor did the CIA discover the courier’s identity from CIA detainees subjected to coercive techniques. No CIA detainee reported on the courier’s full name or specific whereabouts, and no detainee identified the compound in which UBL was hidden. Instead, the CIA learned of the existence of the courier, his true name, and location through means unrelated to the CIA detention and interrogation program.
- Information to support the UBL operation was obtained from a wide variety of intelligence sources and methods. CIA officers and their colleagues throughout the Intelligence Community sifted through massive amounts of information, identified possible leads, tracked them down, and made considered judgments based on all of the available intelligence.
- The CIA detainee who provided the most accurate information about the courier provided the information prior to being subjected to coercive interrogation techniques.
In addition to the information above, former CIA Director Panetta wrote Senator McCain in May 2011, stating:
“…no detainee in CIA custody revealed the facilitator/courier’s full true name or specific whereabouts. This information was discovered through other intelligence means.”
Given the discrepancy between the facts above and what is depicted in the film, previous misstatements by retired CIA officials, as well as what appears to be the CIA’s unprecedented cooperation with the filmmakers, we request that you provide the Committee with all information and documents provided to the filmmakers by CIA officials, former officials, or contractors, including talking points prepared for use in those meetings. Furthermore, we request copies of all relevant records discussing the cooperation between CIA officials, former officials, or contractors and the filmmakers, including records of the meetings that occurred, notes, internal emails, Sametime communications, and other documentation describing CIA interactions with the filmmakers.
Thank you for your assistance on this matter.
Sincerely,
Dianne Feinstein
Chairman
Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
Carl Levin
Chairman
Senate Armed Services Committee
Ex-Officio Member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
John McCain
Ranking Member
Senate Armed Services Committee
Ex-Officio Member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
December 31, 2012
Mr. Michael Morell
Acting Director
Central Intelligence Agency
Dear Acting Director Morell:
In your December 21, 2012, statement to CIA employees regarding the film, Zero Dark Thirty, you state that “the film creates the strong impression that enhanced interrogation techniques” were “the key to finding Bin Ladin” and that this impression “is false.” However, you went on to refer to multiple streams of intelligence that led CIA analysts to conclude that Bin Ladin was hiding in Abbottabad and stated that “Some came from detainees subjected to enhanced techniques, but there were many other sources as well. And, importantly, whether enhanced interrogation techniques were the only timely and effective way to obtain information from those detainees, as the film suggests, is a matter of debate that cannot and never will be definitively resolved.”
In our previous letter of December 18, 2012, we made several points based on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence’s Study of the CIA’s Detention and Interrogation program that are potentially inconsistent with your press release. Principal among those points was that “The CIA detainee who provided the most accurate information about the courier provided the information prior to being subjected to coercive interrogation techniques.”
Accordingly, we would ask that you provide the following to the Committee:
1. In regards to the Bin Laden operation, what information was acquired from CIA detainees subjected to enhanced interrogation techniques? When was this information provided: prior to, during, or after the detainee was subjected to the CIA’s enhanced interrogation techniques? If after, how long after? Please note whether such information corroborated information previously known to the CIA.
2. Please provide specific examples of information that was obtained in a “timely and effective” way from CIA detainees subjected to the CIA’s enhanced interrogation techniques? When was this information provided: prior to, during, or after the detainee was subjected to the CIA’s enhanced interrogation techniques? If after, how long after? Please note whether such information corroborated information previously known to the CIA.
Thank you for your assistance on this important matter.
Sincerely,
Dianne Feinstein
Chairman
Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
Carl Levin
Chairman
Senate Armed Services Committee
Ex-Officio Member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
John McCain
Ranking Member
Senate Armed Services Committee
Ex-Officio Member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
###
Deadline's Dominic Patten - tip him here.



Dear Government:
Please stop spending time and money discussing what “might” have happened in a fictional movie and do your jobs solving our “real” fiscal cliff problems.
Signed,
Everyone
Seriously — I mean come on! are you whores so desperate for a little press that you have to latch onto something like this to get it. Do your fucking jobs and work for your constituents not your own reputations.
Our congress BETTER be multi-tasking. They work on a sub-committee, and it is there job to make sure that the information surrounding our nation’s intelligence is held to a high standard. If the film depicts Americans torturing others for information, and the depiction is based on factual information, that is a very serious problem for the US.
Whoa, shit just got real.
Maybe someone should draft a letter to Dianne Feinstein, Carl Levin and John McCain letting them know it’s well within the world of possibility that they were the ones misled and not the filmmakers.
I wouldn’t be a bit surprised. Although it wasn’t that long ago that they were complaining that they (members of the intelligence committee) weren’t given enough (any?) information by the CIA. Perhaps they’re just p.o.’d that Boal and Bigelow got info from the CIA and they didn’t!
Jeez, with all this nonsense press around Zero Dark Thirty, I’m getting burnt out by the movie before it even comes out.
Really? Who gives a crap? The Congress is the most ineffective in decades, barely got past the fiscal cliff and are preparing to hold the country’s debt rating hostage again over the debt ceiling, and they are wasting their time with this nonsense?
I can only hope that this is entirely for appearances sake, because they are concerned about potential ramifications of portraying the US as a torturer – however, as it is clear that the torture DID happen, regardless of its efficacy. So really, who cares.
Just another useless exercise in absurdity.
The lady doth protest too much
The Senate needs to just focus on now and not the past. All they know how to do is create diversions to avoid the real issues they continue to ignore. The U.S. Govt needs a big overhaul and the Senate and the House need to inflict a 2 term limit so we don’t get stuck useless ‘lifers’ like McCain and Feinstein.
Two terms………great idea. One in Washington and one in jail.
I guess the senators are bored, not much going on… Stop wasting your time on the film biz and start doing something that really matters.
I disagree that the CIA is in any way an innocent in this. I think everyone had a little bit of something to put in. But I do agree that Senate and House really need to put the country’s affairs in order before we have another revolution (or everyone decides to move to another country). Getting all hot under the collar over a stupid movie is not the reason I voted for anyone.
How is this a waste of time? If the CIA is trying to influence the population’s perception of torture as an effective means to an end–it’s not and has never been–then the facts do have to be set straight.
CIA lies. Thats what they do for a living. Just know that then you’ll get whats going on here. the movie is a lie and all this extra nonsense is also a lie. The only truth here is binladen is dead. But when he died is also a lie.
Get em DF! Don’t worry, we’ll all wait in CA while our infrastructure collapses and we wallow in debt. Clearly this is more important time spent!
How about investigating the Bush/Cheney admin loading billions of dollars in shrink-wrapped cash onto pallets and shipping it to Iraqistan, as reported on 60 Minutes, where it promptly vanished into thin air with no accounting whatsoever? Seems to me that with all the talk about spending cuts and paying down the national debt, this should be worthy of the Senate’s attention. And while we’re at it, how about a full accounting of how much the Bush wars have cost the American taxpayer so we have something to stick in John Boehner’s face when he says social security and medicare have bankrupted the country?
Best comment in this thread.
Whoa, idiocracy, that was WAAAAYYY too much common sense, logic and reason for these message boards. I almost fell out of my chair. Usually we get a lot of irrational, Faux news fabricated, Rush Limbaugh generated right wing delusion.
“Hey Sony, he provided the courier info PRIOR to coercive interrogation. NOT after. It was BEFORE we tortured him, not after we did. You totally got that wrong. Also I have some complaints about Star Trek, who should I talk to about that?”
Remember when it was the RIGHT WING that was initially upset about this movie? How the liberal filmmakers had gotten special treatment for what was surely going to be left wing propaganda for Obama catching Bin Laden? And the left was mocking them for politicizing a movie? HA!
Well… it’s still just a movie. And the First Amendment is still the First Amendment. And the chances of ZERO DARK THIRTY winning an Oscar for Best Picture are just as good as 2016: OBAMA’S AMERICA winning Best Documentary.
It’s. A. Movie!
Oh stop. Please. I watched it 3 times. It is, therefore, an awesome movie. I never, ever watch movies more than once unless they are awesome. “All the Presidents Men?” 15 times. “The Verdict?” 5 times. “Chinatown?” 10 times. “On the Waterfront?” 8 times.
“Zero Dark Thirty?” 3 times. Therefore, awesome.
Who cares? This is one of the most boring movies out in a long time. Talking about snoozefest. I went into the screening thinking that it was going to be the best movie for 2012. WRONG…. with all the hype that’s going around… they should thank the CIA for giving them more publicity.
EXACTLY. i think they just made all that money and got their golden globe nominations because of its subject matter, not because of any decent directing or acting.
Meanwhile, the Doctor that actually led the US to bin Laden’s compound sits in a Pakistani prison being tortured and abused for his bravery …while the American Government gloats and debates which of them are the one that ‘got’ Osama bin Laden.
The issue is not whether the senators were misled or whether the filmmakers managed to get information that the committee did not. The CIA in responding to the Committee’s questions had a duty to be truthful. If they were not truthful, or even made statements that were truthful but likely to be misinterpreted, that would be a serious problem. Like being impeached (removed from office) or punished for perjury (a crime), depending under what authority the questions were asked and prosecutorial and congressional discretion. Not getting the truth out of an executive agency should concern us all. That is true no matter the agency or the issue. Gov’t lies are the seeds of tyranny.
The truth about 911 has no expiration date. I as an American have admiration for those people who want to reveal and promote the actual facts of what happened.Innocent people lost their lives needlessly. We owe the truth to them and all of the people who haved suffered in vain.
as far as the cia thing goes, i usually believe the opposite of about 80% of what politicians say so i’ll know at least 75% of the truth.
In any case, i don’t see why people are so upset about this movie anyway, it wasn’t even that good. from what i can tell, it’s just another film taking current events and dramatizing them to make money. besides, Munich was much better.
The irony here? The inner sanctum world of the CIA is really no different from that of the CAAs, WMEs. UTAs, the major studios, etc. The only difference is that the CIA ostensibly protects interests of the country and deals in high stakes life and death circumstances. The reinforced steel walls of Hollywood protect the interests of people who make “Battleship” and “That’s My Boy,” projects that rose to the top of the so-called “so many bad scripts out there.” Wow…..