>> the controversial release of a senate report on enhanced interrogations after 9/11, concerns its publication will cause a terrorist backlash. also why new federal guidelines on racial profiling are getting a lukewarm reception. and how unicef says 15 million children worldwide are facing unspeakable brutality. hello i'm antonio mora, those stories and more straight ahead. >> embassies are on layered awaiting --

>> torture techniques by the cia. >> major backlash and greater security risk. >> this will cause voyages and death. >> proafts against police killings of unarmed black men. >> new guidelines banning federal law enforcement from profiling. >> the key areas are exempted. >> civil liberties groups are not happy with them. >> raging fire in an apartment building. >> tore through los angeles. >> looked like a bomb exploded. >> growing evidence that the happiest part of our lives actually begin in our 50s. >> job status, marital status. >> some of this may be biologically hard wired. >> have you had reports in the past that you had spots on x ray? >> never had x ray. >> how can we move forward? >> this may be the only chance they get. >> we begin with a high state of alert at u.s. facilities around the world. pending tuesday's release of a summary of the senate intelligence committee's report

on cia interrogations after 9/11. the summary is said to condemn techniques president obama has called torture while accusing the cia of knowingly misleading the government officials about the techniques used and the gained intelligence from prisoners . josh earnest comments. >> the release of the report could lead to further risk to u.s. facilities and individuals all around the world. that said, the administration strongly supports the release of this declassified summary of the report. >> but former vice president dick cheney insisted the interrogation program was both authorized and legal. he claimed the senate report was a sort of cover for democrats who were too embarrassed to admit they knew details while

the program was underway. former president george w. bush also praised agency officials who took part in this program. >> these were patriots. whatever the report says if it diminishes their-c their contributions to our country they're way off base. >> agency chief in the middle east and led the hunt to find osama basha bin laden after 9/11. good for both of you to join us. gary i know you agree with former president bush and vice president cheney, the information is something the american public needs oknow. why should the report not be released? >> we've been through this before. most of this has been reported on the press.

i think it's incendiary to put more information out there at a time when we're at war with i.s.i.s. i think it does put american diplomatic missions abroad at risk and evidence of that the administration has sent messages abroad through the department of state channels to prepare for a potential backlash for this. if they weren't concerned they wouldn't have sent the message. >> raha at a press conference in 2009, president obama called torture whatever legal rationales were used were mistaken. then he's insisted that he wants to look forward not backwards. when this issue is concerned he has ruled out, cia officials who have told the justice department justified. what is the purpose, what can it accomplish releasing this? >> well, it's a basic principle of democracy that the people need to know what was done in

their name by their government. that's exactly what we're talking about here. there's always a chance there's some risk bad actors overseas may try exploit our democratic principles. oversights, checks and balances. but that shouldn't stop us. the armed services committee actually put out a similar report examining detainee abuse. when we had 100,00 100,000 troon ground prosecuting a war in iraq. we can do this. we owe it to our democratic checks and balances to really examine and have congressional oversight, over the committee that is a secret agency that operates it in the dark. so we need to learn from the past and we need to have some lessons in the future. >> gary how do you respond to raja? openness do those american values require that we know what our government has done? >> well, let's go pack to a statement that he just made, was

that it was made while we had the 100,000 guys fighting in iraq and we lost thousands of people there. i don't know how much violence was increased because of the releasing of those reports. but the fact is, this could very well have been a contributing fact not loss, the injury and the death of our folks. let me say this, three individuals were water boarded because it was believed they had information of imminent critical attacks or catastrophic attacks on the u.s. the united states was very careful and the cia was careful this, we captured targets 2001 and i was involved in this, we did not interrogate them, the department of justice laid out the guidelines a presidential finding was written and the congress was briefed in the process. people in the congress that say they were not briefed are lying. they were briefed on this. you don't do covert action without a presidential finding and a notification to the

congress and that's both hipse, house permanent subcommittee for intelligence and senate committee. senator feinstein as she's leaving her position at senate select committee for intelligence. >> the bush administration walked away from some of this in its later years. so again are we relitigating something that we shouldn't relitigate? secretary of state john kerry called intelligence chair dianne feinstein, about not releasing the report, he also asked her to factor in the foreign policy implications of releasing it into her timing. so are you not concerned as gary says that this will just give america's enemies another excuse

to attack us? >> well, we always have to be concerned when there's threat damage. very few people in congress were briefed on this program and the american people were kept in the dark almost the entire time. so again in a democracy we deserve to know what the government does in our name and yes, the bush administration started walking away from this program because it wasn't effective. the vast majority of intelligence gatherers are poor base techniques are the best, torture just undermines gathering. than it we need to have a good look at the facts. we can't have it be driven by self-serving statements that authorize or participate in the program, fictional accounts, let's have the truth on torture

let's learn as a nation and let's fix policy going forward. >> gary, i see you want to respond. >> the only point i was going to make is had cia officers proceeded without a presidential finding and notification people would have gone to jail. they haven't gone to jail because people were briefed. are. >> what do you see gary other than attacks on american facilities, are you concerned that foreign countries may not want to participate? as a former cia officer, what kind of effect do you think it's going to have on the cia? >> look, that's a great question. the united states relies on multiple foreign agencies for guidance on this, our program which we assured them would remain secret they're much less likely to cooperate with us in the future. it's a big problem. >> raja what would you like to

see if this report gets released, what action do you think needs to be taken or does no action need to be stain other than making this public? >> well, you know i think this administration ought to work with the congress to make sure we never resort to these policies again. but just to, gaik engag engage in a policy of torture and abuse. in a post9/11 world, nothing should remain secret forever. american people deserve to know what was done in their name. we should be able to cooperate within the rule of law. this has caused problems for us. when they see things like guantanamo, it does bolster their ranks. we need to look at the hard facts and what was done after

9/11, and we need to learn as a country and as a policy making apparatus and move forward. >> we'll see what this report holds, hopefully no serious consequences for americans around the world. gary and raja, good to have you with us. thank you. >> new racial profiling guidelines released, based on gender national origin and religious, in addition to ethnicity. attorney general eric holder said, widespread discitrus in the criminal justice process which so many have raised throw the the nation, it is imperative that we take strong and sound policing practices. but the rules only apply to some federal agents and not state

police, who are facing crofl and criticism in the case of the unarmed black man. permit profiling to continue at airports border crossings and immigration checkpoints. for more we're joined from our stewed ye studio in pittsburgh. he's testified at several senate hearings on racial profiling the constitution and civil and human rights. he's also the author of the work profiles in injustice, why racial profiling cannot work. david, you have bin a voal proponent fobeen a vocalproponer these standards. >> as you said in your opening the big thing here is these rules do not at all touch state and local law enforcement.

that's where the vast majority of the occasions where the americans might encounter the police, that's what they have, the state and the city. this applies to federal agencies. but they don't do the routine law enforcement work that you see on america's streets. the pro filings they might engage in generally is about immigration and national security and there are basically carveouts in the new guidelines. that activity can continue. >> i want to get to that in a minimal. but most states do have bans on racial profiling. if they're involved in a federal tasks, it's a fairly have limited situation. the hope is that this would country. do you think this should have been issued a year ago quj.

>> i don't think it will be impossible, states may do this and say this is a good plan, an example of effectively make the states go anywhere in particular. and that allows still the federal government's main profiling activities when it chooses to do that to to continue. so i don't think there's a lot of things changed. >> let's look at what attorney general holder had to say. >> we can't afford to do law enforcement on the basis of stereotypes. it undermines the political trust but not in. >> he allows it as you are referring to he allows it to

remain in effect in airmingts or maybe 100 times further. >> it's ineffective it doesn't work it blunts our efforts to do law antiterrorism or antilaw work. federal government is not united on this. there are places within the federal government probably customs, homeland security. >> they certainly don't want to let it go. the aclu is certainly on eric holder's side here but doesn't it get silly as aimps when we're looked at what has happened in the last decade or more, things like al gore getting singled out for extra-screening twice.

80-year-old grandmother with kits. >> randomizing security, the effort would be the person who tried to get on the plane and light his shoe frens. it won't protect someone who is is a sophisticated attack ir, it is a basic test of layering the system and hopefully only one are layer of what the federal government is doing to protect us. >> in effect reverse profiling with tsa global reentry that allows people that have gone through the process so less scrunlts, today there's a level of profiling? >> i think there is, over the years we've seen are various things come out that indicate that was true.

what's important here is give the, against it but i can't give it credit for actually doing a full job. if they wanted to stop profiling in the states, they could come out real heavy in favor of a proposal like the end racial profiling act but they have not done that. and that's a real missed opportunity. what they have done is good as far as it goes. but it doesn't go very far. >> so are you convinced that profiling should not exist at all, when it comes to national security concerns? especially in light of you know, all the dangers and the warnings we've heard about foreign fighters, both americans and europeans who have passports who don't need visas into the united states who might be fighting in home? >> if you have intelligence that indicates certain individuals or groups of individuals are involved in a particular

behavior or activity it is them. if you observe behavior that is consistent with those activities, it is 110% legitimate to focus on them. what throws us off is focusing on people because of their appearance. even if that's only part of what gets done. because that duls ou dulls our focus on what is really important in a security context. that is behavior. behavior is the only thing that predicts behavior. appearance does not predict behavior. yourself you just said these people come from many countries and have many appearances. if we get distracted by what people look like , what ethnic way they look, that distracts from security. >> when it comes to policing in our cities. david harris, good to have you with us.

>> my pleasure. >> now for more stories from around the world. we begin at the hague where according to an exclusive report by al jazeera the international criminal court on monday accepted the status of palestine. the move is symbolic victory for palestine and adds to palestine statehood. becoming a nonparty observer is it allows a war crimes trial to be launched against israel. next, we head to the philippines where typhoon hagupit has left at least 27 dead and forced over a million into shelters. torrential rain and winds over the weekend. battling the same region that

typhoon haiyan ravaged last november. that left more than 7,000 dead or missing. hagupit has been down graded to a tropical storm but is expected to bring large amounts of rain coming over manila. we end in los angeles, a blaze which dominated the city's skyline was the size of a city block. the fire forced the highway patrol to shut down parts of two major freeways leaving commuters stranded in traffic for hours. there were no reports of damage or injuries. it is still unclear what caused the fire. that's some of what's happening around the world. coming up the horrifying crises faced by millions of children around the world and the consequences for the u.s. vladimir putin's popularity keeps

soaring, thanks to a are campaign. what's trending hermella? >> a seemingly viral video from afghanistan. and what do you think? join the conversation on twitter @ajconsiderthis and on our facebook page.

>> never in recent memory have so many children been subjected to is such unspeakable brutality, from unicef who says 2014 last been the worst year on record for children around the world. exposed to extreme violence in many cases tortured kidnapped recruited raped and sold as slaves. and the horrors of those conflicts are just the beginning of the challenges that the hundreds of millions of children are facing today. >> good to have you with us. this report is devastating. you highlight this terrible violence in iraq and the palestinian territories south sudan, central african republic

and ukraine and especially in syria where the numbers are just horrifying. we've got thousands of children dead, it's affected more than 7 million kids including 1.7 million child refugees, you also highlight south sudan, 230,000 children there suffering from acute malne malnew transition, hundreds of children being kidnapped from schools or even on the way to schools. it is heartbreaking and these are only a few of the countries you talked about. >> that's right, major conflicts that made the headlines this year, adds up to 15 million children, but the total is 230 million children. beyond the figures, not just numbers of how many are affected, behind every single statistic there's a child. there's a child who is not going to be able to go to school. there's a child who is not

getting his or her vaccine, a child that is not feeling protected. we need to look beyond the statistics and 30 about what the future is going to be like. >> it's a total generation lost as you said it's just a few of the countries. libya somalia congo pakistan, afghanistan, yemen, and also of course nigeria, where the girld were kidnapped earlier-g girls were kit napped and remain kidnapped how do you think it's getting worse. >> the intensity, the brew talts of these countries, that's why this is increasing. the syria conflict for example just not affecting dhirn and lives around, but all around, turkey, iraq, jordan, so the complexity of this conflict, the fact that we are seeing increasingly children

deliberately targeted, not that they're collateral damage alone, we're talking about children being deliberately kidnapped. kidnapped on their way to school or from school. >> to become parts of these extremist organizations. there are real long term consequences. it's hard to believe anybody doesn't care about the welfare of children around the world. but even if the united states was looking at this from a selfish standpoint, there could be long term consequences because a whole new generation is being destroyed and being indoctrinated and brain brainwashed into extremism. >> the chances you going back to school are probably very slim, you are never going to go back to school again. a floral citizen who is going to contribute to the development of his or her country, what future does that have for

you, what future does that have for the country growing up. an entire generation of syrian children, if you don't give them the skills or education or the psychological support they need to go through the horrors that they've been going through, what's going to be the future of these children, the country or the world. >> can't go to school and hundreds of thousands of refugees who are probably not getting anythin getting resembling the education they need. ebola has not only killed children it's orphan ed thousands. >> 5 million of children between 3 to 13 are not going to school right now because of the risk of contagion either. it is affecting their learning as well.

>> what needs to be done? >> thankfully because of the chances of action, we're there unicef, with the rest of the humanitarian partners we're on the ground delivering some of the assistance that children need. because of the fact that we don't have all of the finances we need, one of the major challenges this year has meant that we haven't been able to respond in the areas that we needed to respond because of shortages of funds. central african republic for example, there is a campaign to have more than 600,000 children go back to school gradually as the situation improves within the country, and children who are suffering from severe acute malnew transition, we're providing vac is scenes inside syria for example, there was a polio outbreak, unicef has been able to provide 68 million doses of polio vaccine to help stem the

outbreak and further the spread of polio. >> it's not just the conflict, it's hundreds of millions of kids that don't have access to clean water and so many other aspects. we wish you the best in your efforts and thanks for coming in to see us. >> thank you for having me. >> turning to russia. ruble is falling, and sanctions are taking their toll and the fall of the price of oil. vladimir putin blaming his social ills. >> this is not just a nervous reaction of the united states and their allies to our stance to the events and coup in ukraine. i'm certain if all of this didn't take place they would just come up with another reason for curbing

russia's own goals. >> for more we are joined by peter onsed, nothing is true and everything is possible, peter great to have you with us. you talk about how pr is everything in russia these days how propaganda rules the day. my reaction is, it just doesn't seem much has changed from the days of the soviet union. >> you are right, a lot of this has its roots in the soviet union. they believed they could create a new person through propaganda. that was the theory of marxism through propaganda. now there's not one ideology. there are a range of tactics to achieve certain ends. now looks and feels very different, very western. if you got the switch on russian tv it looks like your show or cnn or something.

>> you call russia a country of nine time zones, where television is the only force that can unify and rule and bind. and now putin and the state pretty much control that incredibly powerful weapon. >> the first thing that vladimir putin did when he became president in 2000 was he took control of television. he got rid of the oligarchs who controlled it who could play king america make -- king maker. that's how important it is to him. >> and you also describe how it creates a fake reality, that even some of the news programs will have fake people on the right and fake people in the left engaging in this debate so that putin somehow comes across leader. >> very much so. all of russian politics are like this. all the preliminary parties you have are essentially coordinated from inside the kremlin. not real opposition.

it's like the circus. they even talk of themselves as theater. not a law making body of some sort. >> reality tv is there to distract the autopsies. you produced it but you also talk about how reality tv has an element of social control. >> various ones. let's say one of the most interesting things that the new kremlin does that the old one didn't, now a whole culture of anecdotes, they do their own sort of is a tire shows about themselves. very carefully guided but that was one of the subtle ways they would use flarp popular structure. >> putin has incredibly high approval ratings. one of your colleagues once asked, can't you see your own government is just as bad as ours, people are believing

this andy western propaganda? >> it's a very cynical almost a nillistic nihilistic view. >> is this antiwestern prop began today really propbegan antiwestern prop antiwestern prop gandactuall prop

prop ganda propganda. >> the russians feel threatened? nato is not there georgia and ukraine are getting much closer to the west and there's been all sorts of conversations about nato help to georgia which is you know -- >> russia was an empire way before nato existed. russia feels itself to be an empire. doesn't see itself as a nation-state. but the idea that it should be expansionist and great is certainly very old. quite the opposite is true. putin like a lot of bullies he needs to be stopped and where his boundaries are and then he changes his are approach. welcoming ukraine into nato. >> even last week this terrible thing in

chechnya. attacked by terrorists there, even that putin has tried to spin it to say to somehow, this is the west behind, how the west could be behind some terrorists, islam extremists is hard to believe, that somehow we're supporting islamic extremists in order to attack putin. >> this conspiratorial view, the conspiracy, they have conspiracy all the time about crazy fungi taking over the air or mystical stuff. that's the language they use really manipulates people, people see the world as conspiracies. >> are you aware of the world order as we have known it for the past few decades do you think that there's any chance that russia will come back and

find some sort of workable relationship with the west? >> it's hard to see that happen because the narrative they've chosen inside the country, it's that we're at war with the west. russia likes to see itself as the bad boy. the global vision is one that sort of hampers america and sees ad hoc loins of various authoritarian states. when they'll be able to make that transition i don't know. >> the book, nothing is true and everything is possible. the surreal heart of the new russia. time now to see what's trending on the webb. hermella. >> ordinary photos have gone viral in kabul. one person tweeted a half-naked girl walking in the middle of normal people. where is the islamic government?

a third wrote, it is an absolutely shameless situation. with reactions like these, it's hard to imagine afghan women walked around mini skirts and they were allowed to volt in 1919, a year before american women gaining suffrage. women were banned from work, couldn't leave home without a male escort and had to wear burkas. women have been slowly able to make gain since 13 years ago. equal rights advocates had a little hope when he thanked his wife during his inaugural speech, she would play a role in advocating for women and children.

many afghan men for many it was a symbolic moment that might signal widening freedoms for women in the country. but antonio, afghanistan is still one of the worst places to be considered for the rights of women. >> coming out much better on the other side. how a third of food goes to waste. why one man is trying to make a difference for thousands of people around the country who don't have health care. >> a deal went against they're own government >> egypt mismanaged it's gas industry >> taking the country to the brink of economic ruin >> this is because of a corrupt deal to an assigned to basically support two dodgy businessmen an israeli one, and an egyptian one... >> al jazeera exposes those who made a fortune betraying an entire nation >> you don't feel you owe an explanation to the egyptian people? >> no...no..

>> al jazeera investigates egypt's lost power on al jazeera america

>> when we think of a mid life crisis what usually comes to mind are the stereotypical images of a man buying a sports car and the onset of strong feelings of worry and doubt like those depicted in many movies including "this is 40". >> why is it 38? >> because your mom wants to be 40. let's not mention it again. >> but a growing body of research reveals going through a slump in middle age may be much more widespread than we think. are we doomed to suffer and existential crises? the summer issue of the atlantic, the real roots of the midlife crisis. jonathan, good to have you with

us. it's a fascinating read. you start from your own experience in the 40s, you said you had every reason to be happy but you weren't. that you're much happier in your 50s, in that process, all those years, what you discovered is that how happiness may be affected by age, particularly what's considered the u curve. >> it is a mystery to me why in my 40s thing were objectively going my way. i continue feel grateful many felt churlish. but in my 50s paradoxically this fog began to lift. in the force of all this, i found this literate coming out of economics on the u shaped happiness curve. it's not for everybody, all human beings are different but there's a very common pattern in human societies around the globe and for that matter even in

chimps and s orangutans. sometimes they don't know what to do about it and make mistakes >> sometimes life satisfaction declines in the first decades of adulthood and it bottoms out in the 40s and 50s and then just comes on back. >> yes, that's the most typical curve. the bottom tends to be around 45, late 40s and starting in the 50s the most scientifically robust part of all of this is satisfaction grows and grows and grows actually well into old age. >> some of it would seem like common sense, that that lower part of satisfaction with life would come in middle age when you have more stress, responsibility, you have -- your parents may be getting older and sick, you have kids who require

a lot of your attention, and drain financial resources. but i guess one of the tings that doesn't seem as much like common sense is the bounce-back sort of afterwards that you get happier as you get older. >> yeah, and this work is being done by a lot of scholars who wand to find out the effect of age per se. so what they do is adjust for things like income children merittal status, employment and they tend -- marital status employment and they seem to find the difference, that it seems to bottom out in mid life. then as you recalibrate expectations get wiser it appears actually this is a million phenomenon as you get older, you get better at regulating emotions, you get better at feeling saturated and content, less likely to fly off the handle with negative feelings, actually you start to feel more satisfied. so my message to people is, it

gets better, if you're feeling low in your 40s that's perfectly normal. there's nothing wrong with you, it's probably just going to go away. >> one of the interesting thinks you just talked about, onset of wisdom, becoming more accepting of light of and this leads to this phenomenon. this is not just an american thing, it happens all the world. >> right. it's not everywhere or every survey but this research is big data surveys. based on happiness well over 100 countries over years, around the world, this curve is not universal. nothing is universal in human life but it is very, very common. it is a standard pattern. and you see it especially in the wealthier countries where people of course tend to be healthier and live longer so they can have

those satisfying late decades in life. >> it isn't clear whether there's a biological component, you mentioned apes a couple of minutes ago and you cite in the article research that found that apes have a similar thing in their mid life. they don't seem to be as content. >> yeah, this was published just last year in research facilities where people tend, chimpanzees and oran gutans. he science here is quite new. it's plausible to see that some of this may be biological, hard wired, some of it is not common. >> people who are unhappy tend to die earlier? >> they are skewed a bit by that. people who are miserable do tend to die younger but of course you

can adjust to that for that to some extent and it turns out the most scientifically robust kinds of findings is, that people are more satisfied later in life, contrary to the theory that you get older and more feeble and bitter. you are living in the present, you feel less competitive and less judgmental of yourself, older brains are better at processing positive emotions, they're better at sort of calibrating emotions so they don't fly off the handle as much and they may actually there's evidence that age may contribute to actual wisdom. that's scientific not just folklore. >> many important messages in this piece that is certainly worth the read. jonathan roush, good to have you.

>> great to be here. tens of of millions of people still don't have health care. one person has provided it with his own money. and waste of food, what can be done to stop that? >> once only available on the black market, now accessible with the click of a mouse. we examine how the internet is fueling the illegal wildlife trade like never before. >> the stream on al jazeera america >> hundreds of days in detention. >> al jazeera rejects all the charges and demands immediate release. >> thousands calling for their freedom. >> it's a clear violation of their human rights. >> we have strongly urged the government to release those journalists. >> journalism is not a crime.

all right, the f.d.a. could be reversing policy banning gang men from donating blood.

an advisory panel last week, said that blood testing is more precise in the past two decades, but restrictions would stay in effect because only allowing men to donate blood if they haven't had sex in more than a year. >> joining us now is damon jacobs and marriage therapist from n.y.u. thank you for joining us this morning. let's start with you. last month announced they were considering shifting his ban. i think he is. the ban started in the early '80s, at a time she didn't have the testing. who at that time they had to, without the knowledge, is test participation recipients of blood. they enacted the ban. a lot has changed. the medical accession and red cross are in favour of lifting the permanent life-time ban. >> what about the time between

infection and detection. >> a few things changed. it took six months. you get tested and if you have a result it's possible you have the virus in his blood. >> it needed to show up. >> the testing - we need to check again. we could get testing. we'll know for sure in a few weeks. it can be as short as 11 days. the practical aspects could be up to a month to find out. >> let's hear from you for a minute. blood. >> i went to give blood in 1991. i was 20 years old. >> it was immediately app pairing rent that the reductions to our report, presented a clear and readable understanding of the study. and prevented us from

understanding the conclusions, so we obviously objected. for the past four months, the committee and the cia, the director of national intelligence, and the white house, have engaged in a lengthy negotiation over the reductions to the report. we have been able to include some more information in the report today without sacrificing sources and methods, or our national security. i would like to ask following my remarks, that a letter from the white house dated yesterday, conveying the report also points out that the report is 93% complete, and that the reductions amount to 7% of the bulk of the report. >> without objection. >> thank you mr. chairman. mr. president, this has been a long process. the work began seven years ago

when senator rockefeller directed committee staff to review the cia cables describing the interrogation sessions of detainees. it has been very difficult, but i believe documentation and the findings and conclusions will make clear how this program was morally, legally, and administratively misguided. and that this nation should never again engage in these tactics. let me now turn to the contents of the study. as i noted, we have 20 findings and conclusions, which fall into four general categories. first the cia's enhanced interrogation techniques were not an effective way to gather intelligence information. second the cia provided extensive amounts of inaccurate information, about the operation

of the program and its effectiveness to the white house, the department of justice, congress, the cia, inspector general, the media, and the american public. third, the cia's management of the program was inadequate and deeply flawed. and fourth, the cia program was far more brutal than people were lead to believe. let me describe each category in more detail. the first set of findings and conclusions concern the effectiveness or lack thereof of the interrogation program. the committee found that the cia's coworsive interrogation techniques were not an effective means of acquiring accurate intelligence, or gaining detainee cooperation. the cia and other defenders of the program have repeatedly claimed that the use of

so-called interrogation techniques was necessary to get detainees to provide critical information. and to bring detainees to a quote, state of compliance,ing end quote, in which they would cooperate and provide information. the study concludes that both claims are inaccurate. the report is very specific in how it evaluates the cia's claims on the effectiveness and necessity of its enhanced interrogation techniques. specifically we use the cia's definition of effectiveness as rattived at approved by legal counsel. the cia claims that the eit's were necessary to obtain quote

otherwise end quote available information that could not be obtained from any other source to stop terrorist attacks and save american lives. that's a claim we conclude is inaccurate. we took 20 examples that the cia itself claimed to show the success of these interrogations, these include cases of terrorist plots stopped, or terrorists captured. the cia used these examples in presentations to the white house, in testimony to congress, in submissions to the department of justice, and ultimately to the american people. some of the claims are well-known. the capture of mr. mohammed, the prevention of attacks against the library tower of los

angeles, and the takedown of osama bin laden. other claims were made in classified settings to the white house, congress, and department of justice. in each case, the cia claimed the critical and unique information came from one or more detainees in its custody after they were subjected to the cia's coworsive techniques. and that lead to specific counter terrorism success. our staff reviewed every once of the 20 cases, and not a single case holds up. in every single one, at least one of the following was true. one, the intelligence community had information separate from the use of eit's that lead to the terrorists disruption or capture. two, information from a detainee

subjected to eit's play no roll. and three, the purported terrorist plot never did exist. the study concludes that no intelligence was ever provided from any detainee the cia held. that is false, and the study makes no such claim. what is true is that actionable intelligence that was, quote, otherwise unavailable, otherwise unavailable, was not obtained using these coercive interrogation techniques. the report also chronicles where the use of interrogation techniques that do not involve physical force were effective, specifically, the report provides examples where

interrogators sufficient information to confront detainees with facts, know when they were lying, and where they applied rapport-building techniques that were developed and honed by the united states military, the fbi, and more recently the interagency high-value detainee interrogation group, called the hague, that these techniques produced good intelligence. let me make a couple of additional comments on the claimed effectiveness of cia interrogations. at no time did the cia's coercive techniques lead to the collection of intelligence on an imminent threat that many believe was the justification for the use of these techniques. the committee never found an example of this hypothetical ticking time bomb scenario.

the use of coercive technique methods regularly resulted in fabricated information. sometime the cia actually knew detainees were lying. other times the cia acted on false information, diverted resources and leading officers or contractors to falsely believe they were acquiring unique or actionable intelligence and that the interrogations were working when they were not. cia often called into question the effectiveness of the cia's interrogation techniques, noting how the techniques failed to elicit detainee cooperation, or produce accurate information. the report includes numerous examples of cia officers questioning the agency's claims, but e