it all began on a dark and stormy night or anything. it's tied to a speech i gave at duquesne university in 2007 after was director of the cia to the graduating class. the folks also duquesne, my mall matter. i used that to pivot -- mall matter. i used that to palestine off my pittsburgh experience and brought that with me to the cia. catholic, liberal arts education, i mention in the book i was in america's air force before i was in a class classroom that didn't have a crucifix in it. wonderful, broad, culturally based historically based education which stood me in agreed stead. values based from the paroll rockieal school to the catholic high school to duquesne university and of course from my parents and then it was in pittsburgh which is a blue color town and a white collar economy and a but collar style of life.

... >> it used to be the case back when people just wrote did -- letters in longhand and put

stamps on them that there was something i think called the mail match which would let the government tell the post office, if you see anything coming to, going from, we want to keep track of address --

>> they're also reading the message, and people got very scared and worried about that. could you help clear up what's going on? >> there's so much said to be about that. the public got stampeded into what i calm the darkest corner of the room after that story came out. i've done a lot of that on how, some of the press covered it. frankly we should ems brace a little bit of that responsibility ourselves in the i.e. we probably could have been more forth come closing snowden telling our story in explaining what it was that we were doing. but to look at the essential element that you described, metadata is the outside of the envelope for electronic communication. american law enforcement traditionally has been able to look at the outside of the envelope, the supreme court decided that the fact of your

phone call who you called when, for how long, also was essentially the outside of the envelope a fundamental case many 1979 smith versus maryland court held like the outside of the envelope metadata had no expectation of privacy and therefore not constitutionally protected. so when we gathered all of that will data in after 9/11 under the federal winds program to be fair, jim, congress then limited access to metadata in the fight to act. foreign intelligence surveillance act but it was not constitutionally limited it was limited by statute. and after 9/11, the president uses his article two commander in chief authorities decided that to the degree of statute stop commander in chief from doing that, the statute had to

be unconstitutional because it was limiting his inherent article. by the way, that stood up. that is stood up in court. all right, on two occasions the appellate court with that constitutional authority. so we gathered the data. we could i think constitutionally done a lot with it. but out of respect or for american privacy, we didn't. we gathered the data, we put it into for a better term, a lock box where it was just lying there fallow, all right, and we want try to create relationship or run algorithm against it which is common practice in business. all we did joe was when had we got knowledge of what we called a dirty number we have a safe house in yemen, never seen this phone before, wow, this phone is really worrisome. i wound for that phone has ever called the united states i'm being cartoonish here.

but we get to go and say anybody, here talk to this phone in yemen and we're in new york. in the bronx raises the hand and goes once a week we get to say who did you talk to? and jim i have now completed my explanation of the metata-ta program. that's all we did. now there's a nervousness among far right, left in the political sprek trum. i don't care where bruce it or not hayden. i don't have the government to have the ability to abuse it. >> no good deed goes unpunished. had you pushed your authorities to ultimate legal possibility it might have gotten less of a -- angry reaction. >> that maybe. >> l yeah. but i'm on a panel out of aspen, keith alexander is with me,

successor, schmitt google is there. saying he doesn't understand how powerful metadata is learn relationships on and on, and keith and i go that's true eric. but we don't do that. [laughter] we say is did that number do this? >> google and amazon particularly along with, you know, saving companies like to manage data, know a lot more about you and what you buy, and what sites you visit and so forth than the u.s. government does. >> and jim and then the public discussion got everyone worse. a lot of folks should know better who say consistently, even after someone may have tried to explain this to them, say king thely, and then, and then if they really get interested in who called that number this can schismly click on that number and get contents of the call and my explanation of that is that's not only a

violation of the lawsuit in the united states that's a surveillance of the law of physics you can't do that. not physically possible. : let me turn you to another simple, easy going subject waterboarding. >> uh-huh. >> i have been in many discussion about about this curious to your large view and not precisely clear in the book, are navy seals and are -- special forces perhaps water boortd as training. >> as a american airman. deputy former navy seal waterboarder. there's and then also the case that journalist factoring the peek interest this this couple of years ago -- when had had themselves waterboarded to write a better article for magazines and so forth.

now, the test for torture is not simple and clear. i don't know anything called torture other than bamboo under one ice fingernail done by journalist to see what it's like ore done as part of our navy seal training. there's got to be something a bit different about about waterboarding which might put it in the same category as the for some purposes, that you -- put i think sleep deprivation into, in some difficult circumstances, if the potential payoff in saving lives could be substantial, you could limit someone's ability to sleep if they were or terrorist, suspect, prisoner, whatever. of think of the water boarding in the same ware or not? >> i do in a sense but let me

caveat you're right. i treat it in -- in some depth in the book. not because i wanted to self-justify is frankly all of the waterboarding done before i got -- but to try to create historical record and i do that in the book. you're right i do make distinction everyone agrees there's things that are always wrong and you can't do circumstances. and then thing over here nobody has guesses about it, and then you have this body of steps in the middle that didn't -- and to be perfectly canny waterboarding is way over. it's on the edge so what i say, i repeat in the book is that -- to judge whether or not waterboarding is ethical, moral, legal, appropriate, you need to understand that the touty of circumstances in which you find yourself. and even once you digest to the

circumstances, honesty can tifer. i didn't use waterboarding, i was part of the administration with we took waterboarding off the table. that's because i had different circumstances than george had and more penetration of al qaeda and better knowledge of their threat profile and more restrictions and congress had taken steps i removed it and no judgment on what had gone on before it. when people asked me when would you have done it, this is in the heart and i repeat this in the bock, i said my answer is i thank god i never had to make that decision. for those who are quick to criticize, they may want to thank god too. that someone else stepped up an made that u tough call. which is kind of what someses pects of intelligence are about making decisions that nobody else will make. >> in an indefinite gray area

jim as you know. >> let me ask you about khalid sheikh muhammad there was a dispute about he being the only person who was waterboarded a substantial number of times is distinct from once or twice, whether or not the boarding of him produced information from him that did, in fact, help us lead to osama bin laden's career or to osama bin laden what's your view on that? >> really nice to have this golden thread and say ding, ding, a lot better. so you've been in the same office. hundred was thousands of threads and end up really good in a fabric gets to where you want to be. so to have ta-ta point, it wasn't waterboarding that made him talk. it was sleep deprivation.

okay so we did use waterboarding but at the end of the day one of the other techniques. now having said that there was a difference in how chic sheikh mohammad there was defiant didn't turn into a boy scout or patriotic democrat but more cooperative over here and, in fact, a large volume of information including information that helped us on the career. now can i do this -- begad that it doesn't work that way. gym, let me give you the way that i explained it again in the book and from the bottom of my heart. all right. i cannot imagine any operation like what happened at the bug taking place, it's not relying on that shoppers through warehouse of information we got from the 100 plus detainees.

it was like -- encyclopedia al qaedaist -- and now with the ease of -- once you find them if you point out is have heart disease but find a terrorist to be able to kill him with -- say a hell fire from a drone, along with the pakistani border, that is something that is -- is still doable tech no logically or for us in ways that it hasn't ever been before, and as a result we have killed a lot of people that if we captured them, we might get a good deal of information from them. but we can't get information are from them if we can't sometimes use enhance interrogation methods. or at least something that is

not over the border but on the tough side of the spk trum -- spectrum that you've droobed. i've characterized this as treating terrorist leak trout in certain streams catch -- can't catch them and worrisome an odd use of time. >> we haven't done quite the catch and release but i'll walk through this. we have made it so legally difficult, and politically dangerous to capture and hold someone that we seem like we just deit fault to the kill option. now, u john, jim if we have our successor john in here, all right. he would no, no, we're still in the capturing business just operate if we have a chance and so on. and john speaking his heart too. but if you just look at the

numbers, all right, since january of 2009. i probably got nor fingers up here that we have people that we have captured and held for american interrogation. do you think that's important because we're pretending rules of criminal law and criminal justice apply to what we're supposed to do? with respect to terrorist and at war with terrorist movements. >> one of the themes that i try to emphasize. because in the public debate it's kind of got this default option that if you're not treat them as you would in the criminal justice system, then you're acting in a lawless way, and what i try to point out is no, no, no, stop, stop, we have multiple legal structures under which had we can operate. youthe criminal justice system s is useful. don't give that up. you can use that, but you have u laws of the foreign conflict and you have two presidents and the congress say we're at war with

these people. and thref, if we choose, if that's -- if that gives us more po ittence can operate under law of conflict tbhowt but not under criminal justice. >> weapons of mass destruction, i'm particularly curious why we got into the habit of talking about wmd instead of talking about each weapon independently because one produces biological weapons in a very different way. if you turn them into powder you can have huge volume that once they're liquid in powdered form in back say of a volkswagen, you chemical weapons or manufactured completely differently of course than nuclear weapons. and people get confuse inside

talking about wmd. but the government has never trieded to make this clear. why? what's going on? rng you know, of the underlying themes despite your inclination and mine that we leave them alone. secret security service by the way that never worked and it doesn't work in today's society where there's such a high demand for transparency so cost of doing business is more transparency, and your question -- jim go that's just not pending to challenge in political culture. to be a real benefit to that because you're actually telling the american people precisely why it is that you're concerned about that. let me point out how we looked at wmd with regards to terrorism. for example, we always said kim,

biodetonation and given them to jim in the order eve probability. so we kind of wmd. well, you know as well as i, we parsed it much more tightly inside the business. and you know the american people are pretty smart. they could get that explanation. >> one thing that you put in a book, first time i've seen it in -- work like this, this very important which is had that if one is enriching uranium up it a level of 20% which is what you need for million you have done 0% of the work necessary to get it to weapon -- it's a gee metric progress. >> not a straight curve. and i think there's a lot of misunderstanding about that. people being relaxed about iran

having let's say some 20% enriched one time or another during the debate of all of this become over years. but that's another subject that has never really been clearly explained effectively to the public an to journalist or if it has been explained people don't pick it up. >> i try to bear myself about the iranian question i'm uncomfortable with the joint comprehensive nuclear deal but i end the chapter saying something along line of, i don't think we would have bought this deal but it felt like we had a better idea either. so this had been a problem that is deviling us. >> better idea to keep the sanctions -- [laughter] >> i understand. but trying to suggest this is a very, very difficult -- >> sure. >> it is. for us to deal with.

one last -- on this progression thing. one reason i'm comfortable with iranian nuclear deal is if it works, okay, if it does everything we've wanted to do and no one cheat, will they cheat of course they cheat but in a way that matters, maybe not. buzz jim they just weight ten years. that would be industrial strengthed nuclear power never more than a few weeks away from enough to sell material. for a weapon -- >> key point. >> let me ask -- a set of questions that people ask me and i panel they ask you which are your favorite novel spy movies -- whether or not any of the movies really have anything to do with reality and if there is something that has to do with reality, and i'll offer an

example that in the espionage world, it's often hard to find. but there's a film several years ago, german film call lives of arms powerful about germany and 1980s before the world -- >> electronics surveillance. see that movie. >> it as far as i'm concerned it's as god as movies get issue really, really what happens in intelligence this thing from -- from battling so forth. >> other ideas. >> so reason on road was to actually kind of pull the veil back. you know, and let people see into the nature of their own security services. i mentioned there something -- been around the world talking to cias officers never met jack bauer never met jack ryan. [laughter] okay. >> even ryan. so -- and so although there's truth

and search as you know, i've talked about forms of art. i wanted to show you a little bit of reality in terms of fear. now, taking that and now moving into the roam of search two or three examples. the best written piece on cia i think is actually the first article, agent of innocence. it was actually reviewed on the cia website, very unusual and i still rib one of the lines, agencies of innocence is a novel u tbus not good. so no relationship to the other farthest thing possible but bob was -- remarkable officer in station chief, and david i think, slightly but people knew him when he was killed when embassy blown up, no is not exactly a

biography but it's close, an it really doses i completely agree it really does give you a feel for twhas like to be an officer. >> i teach at george mason i want to talk about covert action. i signed the book. we just talk about in the book that's pros. more visual i have home lanked. okay, and it is my short film right of homeland. everything in foreground, that's wrong. you pull out a cell phone somebody can pull a side arm. never going to happen. it rings true, and then let me pull out "zero dark thirty" which is bottom of 8, and my line there is there are many things in there that are correct but are not factually correct. i touch upon this in the book.

i say look, they say for example, that there's a straight lean in the movie. between enhance interrogation and getting it abadabad. in real life they were connected as we discussed but not like this. it's like this. first 20 minutes of the movie are alleged cia interrogation. infinitely over the top. that said, i mean jim we wrnght very nice to a couple of dozen poem. so correct not factually accurate and then you have mia, hero. it was not an individual effort but again artist eggly correct versus track factually i will tell you that team that got bin laden once a band of sister. they were with compromised of woman before chasing him before he was cool for the rest of the

agency. >> on interrogation -- at least in my favorite were smileys but as we know, of course, the cia grew out of a marl organization. and as a result of that heritage, it is the full prime employees of the cia who operate particularly overseas or called officers not agents. >> cia officers recruit agents inside al qaeda. fbi agents informants, why can't hollywood an some people get this right? >> jim it's actually insider code that i use personally. get it wrong, i go all right you don't know what you're talking

about. [laughter] it's a great tipoff. >> i had a guy claim it be a cia officer and did that wrong didn't give too much time. what -- what about the concern -- issue of whether what we do in the intelligence business can be characterized by something very different than what might say officer, miller and special forces. they're trained to kill. but they don't, they don't lose track of their reality and go killing their comrades and colleagues. >> identity. right. virtually it never happens. whereas in the intelligence business, in a way officers gofers and taught to lie, cheat

about who they are, and steal to recruit spies, inside organizations, and so forth. i've had difficulty getting people to dpeart depart from political correctness to admit that -- officer like. right, right that's what we really do or what -- that's what officers in the intelligence service really do. in the service is for their krrpt and that's one why when those things get distorted from time to time none other has killed anybody having being taught the special forces. but soft us know what it might be like to fib every once in a while. so if we know that that's why spy novels are intrigue because their about the misapplication

of those skills to doing something you're not supposed to do as the distinct from -- from doing a use them in espionage. so right in the middle of the book, i twails tack this issue on by head on. and if i begin it with a quote from the dylan song from the 60s side three of the w on blond, and the line is when you're up outside the law, you really got to be honest. [laughter] and -- i follow that quickly saying cia doesn't operate outside of the law at least not outside of american law. and then i go on. and so -- jim i mean this from the heart and i give anecdotes in the book that the moral -- responsibility the moral weight you place on someone to act the way you just described is an fin

credibly difficult burden. i talk about, i talk about going down to the farm or graduation or for case officers after our field training course an talking to the the graduates and actually tell them about this mall responsibility. you will cultivate sources. and people agree to cooperate with you, they are placing their fate and the fate of their families in your happedz. you maybe only pass of america these people ever see. never forget your moral responsibility. that you've ems braced by recruit are this person or that person and so -- and so swrim, again i stress this. we can stand the stake because we're always operating out there on the emg of low prbility shots. as you know. we don't get the easy burdens. we can stand the stex but we can't stand dishonesty. if you have an officer who is

not total candid with you, you have no use for him demanding profession. yeah. whret me turn to iran 80% of your focus at one point. >> particularly with per of how much focus is on iran. very rare event and what i'm describing this in chicago in it is of '08 i have the turn and say 80% mr. president. or president elect. >> that's -- there's that and then your formulation by use initials of three thing hads you focus on counterterrorism. you tell us. >> so people used to ask me, so -- what's your priorities here hayden i respond it is like

washed in alphabet soup. rest of the world now that's not a happy description. there's a lot of stuff in the rest the world that we're cool into the distant third to terrorism and proliferation so demanding but that's my honest assessment of where we were. >> now, iran has distinguished itself by being number one terrorist sponsoring the states in the world. and by lying a great deal i think that's the -- ihea as i understand it from their point of view, recommended not just tolerated. i think it's important for people to understand what

happened to issue whether iran was or was not in the process of reacting to iraq or was, in fact, under the process of trying to build up itself in such a way as to dominate that part of the world. saddam was clearly worried about iran as a result of the iran iraq war. one new report suggests that the impair gays interrogation by him and pirro fbi agent. very effective interrogation indicated that he, in fact, no longer have have earlier period of time weapon of mass destruction but convince the world that he did have them in

order to deter iranians that reverberation nrnd that survey. could you purchase some of that? >> so many of to look at. iran was second most discussed topic in the oval office. it tears them and you have iran. you talk about other stuff but we didn't talk about other stuff anymore jim that it was number three. terrorism, and then it -- was iran. president bush and -- he usedded to ask me two kinds of questions about iran. one was the straight mechanical. how much do you think they got there and enriched an so on. other question he give me, i remember an incident in the chapter there. how do these guys make decisions? this is incredibly opaque decision and difficult to penetrate and i tell the story that the president bush wases

impatient. he had some regards for me and i have a great duel of affection for me but he shooted anger. he said mike, look, i get it. north korea is a close society but or for god's sake we have tens of thousands of americans going back and forth between plans los angeles and taiwan every summer. how come we don't know more? answer jim, is it is tough to crack. they have good security force and no iranians understand really how iran makes decisions because of the different powers there. i want to turn to the new york police department. you had a fascinating effective relationship with them and most americans they think of the cia once it gets that clearly in often enough operates over cities.

and yes -- they have had offices here in the united states and if you are going to someplace that americans don't normally go. me and mr and you want it say i'd be glad to come back to chat with somebody that works here, that's tune not covert or compensated but something in suit. and -- but it's everything overseas. whereas domestic fbi crime, deal with it. now, how did the cia get together with the new york city police department and why and what was going on? >> so this is part of the legal amoebaty like we don't know what's had lawful or not lawful. but what had i mean jim for well over a century we had decided to protect our security and our liberty. by putting stuff in separate boxes.

one over here, domestic over here, and intelligence over here, law enforcement over here. and the attacks of 9/11, swrim were right down that seem between foreign and domestic intelligence, so i tell the tale that out of more responsibility, we had to close that seem. so congress actually legislates fbi to be a domestic so cultural here too. in addition we viewed new york as being a special case that, i mean, new york is essential in america but not of america. one thursday of the city wasn't born in the united states. still one-third. we realize that would be the case back in the 19th century. >> twice as large as the next largest police force in america.

it is more than twice as large as chicago police force which is even larger than los angeles police force. we're talking about great scale so ray kelly urngdz mayor are bloomberg had a aggressive intelligence program. that we actually thought it was about, our responsibles to try to support. and so we with set up a -- tight, to use the world liaison relationship with the fbi. now they things that were controversial so far cross calling and other things and i would never recommend what nmed nypd did here for police walking. this is a special kas so we work very hard knowing that new york was a special target. that we would have a special relationship with the nypa and cowen he points out that they -- about there were 17 nonplots

against new york in the town he was there within and idaho 0-7 we owe a lot for david who did that during those times. i want to ask you about a couple of cases protecting your people. we both run into this. we caught on my watch, but senate upset because it didn't matter how many times i explained that the people who probably would have been fired were all retired. and you can't fire someone who is already tired. but i couldn't get that -- message across that time it is often are out of joint you had to deal with issues that arose before you became director, and

r and some of the beginnings of all that didn't manifest until after you were directed riffs particularly intrigued by the -- case officer the woman wrongly identified almazri. tell us about what happened there. because i thought it spoke great with how handled it -- >> thank you for saying that. when it was happen hadding i thought it was easy decision. now i think it was easy decision but it appear to have been -- >> then people wouldn't have meads. appears to be controversial. i spent a lot of time on it because it suggests what -- is the right word? >> moral pressure, conflicting pressure and agency like cia. to get to the point. picked up someone macedonians told us they had him we did our

check. we thought he was who we were chasing analyst looked at it to the best of her ability decided this is somebody we need to talk to. he was taken to black site interrogated but it was, not in all techniques they were slow in acting after realized these are not droabs you're looking for the the not what you're looking for. several months but released them in sent him on his way. that part of the story bears second looking because how come you didn't act more quickly and so on. but inspector general the wants me to focus on those who made thed decision we need to talk to this person and take custody of him. and the idea that you want to follow me with ability board and ability much your peers but to

make a judgment i thought slings not. as a director you view this and you're responsible for overall health of the agency and success of the the mission. i said that, you know, if i pin analyst for creating false positive aisle be teaching every analyst in this agency city that one thing you have to make sure you avoid is any false positive which would then be -- that the analysts would be playing back from their judgment in order to be safe and we would probably have more true positives get through because -- if i do a full positive bad things could really happen to me. if i skip over a true positive bads things might happen but they won't happen to me. >> right. rights. >> i said this in conscience how could we possibly do this? i said look this is just not

going it happen. by the way one of the best analysts we've had who is on the jury of her peers? >> that many peers. [laughter] it was easy for me but we had this urban legend of accountability that permeates the book. say you walk into the concourse you go up the stairs to the george h.w. bush we qo where others cannot go. we work and a narrow space that no one has asked or allowed to work in. we work in space in look concern i was doing a briefing downtown to some of our -- directorring there. and there were plans two togs about global situations. i do any big map, little in the

world. finally someone is incident in the city and some say on a scale of 2-10 how would you rate c rk about a analyst? >>s first thing rough to koamed is it shall you don't do eight, nine were on ten. if you can get to eight, nine, or ten they're asking department of commerce to question. they aren't asking -- [laughter] that's what had i try to display back to pullings the bell back and see what actually happens inside cia and nsc. extremely ordinary in that they're having to do extraordinary things. >> pretty good are. i want to ask you who you worked with really stappedz out to you

as somebody wold go extra mile to get the right thing done. i tell you who mine is. charlie wilson the congressman. hogs of appropriations committee we nebraska would have gotten predator without charlie. he would move the money around you're not breaking any laws or anything but being on the appropriation sub committee for defense. you have a lot of flexibility and combination of the directions flexible greater than that is much the executive branch to get through the real flexibility that he had a committee member made it possible for us to -- we would sit there and lose 500,000 from one account to three -- krepghts are 5 750. but if we have to do it right he was just terrific, and -- i my example what are yours?

>> couple come to minds not self-serving to the administration but anybody like national security advisor? viced a straightforward conversation with steve. one, and i'll read kind of these kinds and what i would call up, say see this mike. i have a decision to make and it's mine. so i will make the decision but i want to let you know that andi would just -- and essence, i don't know that i was even inviolating him to be sounding bored and giving him warning that i might be jumping over the sides here and you may have to be pulls me out. he was forever stapled for whatever had had willing to coffer your back. i was -- i got invited to be on "meet the press" one of two restaurantses last summer god rest his soul so mark dark plblist comes in and says "meet the press" here.

i said let me hit the right switch. matt, steve. i've been invited to be on that with steve new sunday. good, good luck. no ploil guidance. no lefts and light hand boundary so just good. het the confident in the agent through me. that actually allowed us stabilize things in '07 '08 i got selected to be the director in the process of i lay out here, kind of that phone call john -- peer of new york the dmentd.n.i. fundraiser president will want to talk to you tomorrow. mike, okay, i had a good understanding what it was. so i literally gym swhi recount this and i walk to my outer office to the e.a. director

assistance. find steve -- tracked him down in london and i got in touch with steve and said steve it's mike. mike how are you doing great steve, would you ever consider to be the deputy director of cia. he said to me well mike that would really dpebt a lot into the director. and i said steve i'm not at liberty to discuss that but i am the one making this calls. and he said i'll get back to you. two hours after he talked to kathleen his wife he said had okay if you're number one i'll happily comb back. and we had a wonderful relationship. these meetings go, and if i talk about a lot of these and you get that 5:00 ct meeting these are operational. you're mag decisions.

and very often our beginning of the the input and that would go high. we're going to do and i say are you right with that? not given decision somewhere else. but as a friend. you know where i was at -- another time steve and i were in the room after a eny covoter action decision, and everyone les will have the the room and steve there -- looking and i'm looking at steve in western pennsylvania browns and i'm pittsburgh steelers. everything in eastern idaho making that kind of decisions. >> steve and i were in the same law enforcement together and we negotiated settlements and when we were negotiates the good cop and bad cop there was a bad cop. flf >> a wonderful good thing.

you had something happen when yous first went to the agency. before immediate went down and electronic -- >> when i first went to nsa, and it was, obviously, a bracing experience and loomed to some extent on your mind and a chapter book. what concerns about the future ofs e-the electronic infrastructure of the government national government particularly do you think are salients and what do we need to do? >> that's had the first -- doesn't woman fist chronologically maybe in materials of the timeline but first chapter in the bock such a powerful experience for me. in essence i'm directing this for 10 months i get a phone call i think it was a monday night

and the system is down. sir. i'm sorry what do you moon the system is down, what part of the system is down? all. all right. we were unabling to move data still collecting data but we couldn't move it, process it, analysis it and so on. we stayed or more for 72 hours jim which means america was pretty much not collectings intelligence for half a week. which had is as you know that's a big dole. because signal intelligence squirmish line for events coming at you so it taught me severalling this things with ber get in gear, other one i've been director 10 months and i knew i had inherented a national trch i knew it was falling

technologically behind the. first do no harm. this thing goes belly up. listen there's no action that qowb more dangerous than standing still. so addition to technological lesson that i drew from it there was a psychic listen, move out and we began a aggress i-program. we outsourced it gave it to a private contract and not constrained bier patterns of american federal budgets. to refresh our i.t. and get us somewhere close to the 24th century. >> very interesting is i've been very concerned about vulnerability e electronic i did and to cyberto electromagnetic

poll so both short range and detonated bid u new up in orbit. there are just a numple number of things that could take down the operation of her -- electronics and our grid, and probably hit first on our national intention. >> i write the man clps u script and all done and i go i don't have anything here in cyberand it's true story. [laughter] thinking i'm done here. wait a minute you know i've got a snip it here, there, but no aggregation of the cyberdomain had and i started to write e sales and it gushed out of me in terms of importance of with you're dribbing and how much it is fund fundamentally changed

american life. the way we fight wars. the way we collect or protect, intelligence, and actually when i was done riding that, i stie stepped backs at intersections that said well, this pretty detailed history of an evolution jim parking the outside looks w. but those of us in government to get to the tailored center and cybercommand i know most civilians those are words but fund mentally we built a structure in the outs government to conduct operations in cyberdo mainmain that'sed speed of light for government agencies and we -- anyway, i really try to lay that out. now, i -- talk about moral data i don't

think that's quite accurate. more are doing it and i'm sad if we're more public and aware of it so we get militarizing it. so i actually fall back to, you know, the cyberdo main, air, space, cybernobody complains about navies. actually a lot of navies a lot of people think navies are essential to keep the commons coming. and so, you know, cyberdo main that is controversial. i kind of take that on head on. i come at the last light in the chapter something along lines here we are. i was aware for a lot of it and live with cons chemical chemica. >> expand for me on your fascinating characterize of the forced cia culture to the service and being fighter pilot,

the -- analyst being like ten-year faculty and university like the people who make things operate and support system essential is your former steeler fans, and the science and technology. [laughter] yeah, i took pain one of the parts of the book they really enjoyed writing i think it's called espionage family life and bureaucracy and i bring all different aspects into it. cia culture. and i say the drive through the fence line and you think cia is a single now. and i make the point it's never a singular now . oh on a good day it's a collective noun. most days it's plural and you

have each of these four funds mental trerkt ares. now not in the bock but post writing the bock but john, brennan, or our successor is is there. john is trying to cut through those -- those four cylinder of excellence because -- we need to wrap up. notable culture and you have to learn to deal with each. >> good. and i loved your final quote in one chapter i'm going to close with that because it's a nice guide to the way you operate as well as a great guide to people particularly in senior position and government said you're the only superpower in the world but don't act like it. >> that's rightses. my guidance our station. thank you, jim.

that was afterwards booktv program in which authors of the nonfiction books are interviewed. watch past afterwards programs online at booktv.org. this past week, president obama announced the nomination of karla hayden to become 14th library of congress. doctor hayden has been the ceo of the enoch free library in baltimore, maryland since 1993 and has been a member of the national museum and library services board since 2010. another post she was nominated for by president obama. here's dr. hayden in 2004 discussing her opposition to the patriot act. >> libraries are one of the building blocks of a free and

open society and when members of the public enter a library for whatever reason, to pursue their own intellectual interest and look up something that they have a curiosity about or find out about subjects they've heard about. no one should be examined or scrutinized by anyone especially by the government. and the american library association supports the protection of confidentiality and freedom that accompanies it, and we find hearts pa of the u.s. arks patriot act threatens these freedoms. infact, we remember fbi and if i library practice and as librarians we ensure safety of our fellow americans but it's time for the government to start wasting its time on the security risk posed by americans for

research for learning or just for fun. the new and expanded authorities under patriot act allow the federal government to investigate and to engage in surveillance of citizens and others without having to demonstrate any reason to believe their engaminged in illegal activitieses and to threaten the siflt liberty guaranteed on the united states constitution and the bill of rights. dr. hayden will be first african-american and woman to hold a position of library of congress. confirmation hearings yet to be sent by the senate. booktv continues now jamie mayor discussing her most recent book, "dark money" she'll talk about all of her books and answer your questions live on in-depth next sunday march 6th at 12 p.m. eastern.