the cia also mislead other cia white house officials. when vice president cheney's counsel asked cia counsel general in 2003 about the cia's videotaping the water boarding of detainees, muller deliberately told him that videotapes, quote, were not being made, end quote, but did not disclose that videotapes of previous water boarding sessions had been made and still existed. source, email from scott muller dated june 7th, 2003. there are many many more examples in the commit tease report. all are documented. the third set notes the various ways in which cia management of the program from its inception to its formal termination in january of '09, was inadequate and deeply flawed. there is no doubt that the detention interrogation program was by any measure a major cia undertaking. it raised significant legal and policy issues, and involves significant resources and funding. it was not, however, managed as a significant cia program. instead it had limited oversight, and lacked formal direction and management. for example, in the six months

the ciaed. used these examples t presentations to the white house, in testimony to congress, in submissions to the department of justice and ultimately to the american people. some ofim the claims are well-known. the capture of khalid sheikh mohammed. the prevention of attacks against the library tower of los angeles and the takedown of osama bin laden.he other claims were made only in classified settings, to the white house, congress, and the department of justice. in each case the cia claimed that critical and unique information came from one or more detainees in its custody after they were subjected to the cia'ss. coercive techniques andn that information led to specifiu counter terrorism success. our staff reviewed everyone of the 20 cases and not a single case holds up. in every single one of thesese cases at least one of the following was true. one, the intelligence community had information separate from the use of eits that led toe the terrorist disruption or capture. two, information fr

the cia also misled other cia white house officials. when vice president cheney's counsel, david abbington asked scott mueller in 2003 about the cia taping of waterboarding detainees, mueller said that videotapes were, quote, not being made, end quote, but did not disclose that videotapes of previous waterboarding sessions had been made and still existed. source, e-mail from scott mueller dated june 7th, 2003. there are many, many more examples in the committee's report. all are documented. the third set of findings and conclusions notes the various ways in which cia management of the detention and management program from the inception to the formal termination in january of '09 was inadequate and deeply flawed. there is no doubt that the program was by any major measure a major cia undertaking. it raised significant legal and policy issues and involved significant resources and funding. it was not, however, managed as a significant cia program. instead, it had limited oversight and lacked formal direction and management. for example, i

cia general council scott muller, cia deputy director of operations, cia acting general council johniz strkso and cia deputy director john mclaughlin. and a variety of interrogate pors, lawyers, medical personnel senior counterterrorism analyst and managers of the detention and interrogation program. the best place to start about how we got into this -- and i'm delighted that senator rockefeller is on the floor -- is a little more than eight years ago on september 6, 2006. when the committee met to be briefed by then director michael hayden. at that 2006 meeting, the full committee meeting learned for the first time of the use of so talled enhanced interrogation techniques or eits. it was a short meeting in part because president bush was making a public speech later that day disclosing officially for the first time the existence of cia black sites and announcing the transfer of 14 detainees from cia custody to guantanamo bay, cuba. it was the first time interrogation program was explained to the full committee as details had previously been limited to the chairman and vice chairman.

second, the cia and the cia senior officers have taken the opportunity to explain their views on cia detention and intergangs of operations. they have done this on the record statements and classified committee hearings. written testimony and answered questions. through the formal response to the committee in june 2013, after reading the study. and third, the committee had access to and utilized an extensive set of reports of interviews conducted by the cia inspector general and oral history program. while we could not conduct new interviews of individuals we did utilize transcripts or summaries of interviews of those directly engaged in detention and interrogation operations. these interviewinterviews occure time it was operational. and covered the topics we would asked about had we conducted interviews ourselves. the interview reports and transcripts included but were not limited to the following: george tenant, director of the cia when the agency took custody and interrogated the majority of detainees. jose rodriguez, director of the cia's counter terrorism center, a key player in

second, the cia and cia senior officers have taken the opportunity to explain their views on cia detention interrogation of operations. they have done this in on-the-record statements in classified committee hearings, written testimony and answer to questions and through the formal response to the committee in june 2013 after reading the study. and, third, the committee had access to and utilized an extensive set of reports of interviews conducted by the cia inspector general and the cia's oral history program. so while we could not conduct new interviews of individuals, we did utilize transcripts or summaries of interviews of those directly engaged in detention and interrogation operations. these interviews occurred at the time the program was operational and covered the exact topics we would have asked about had we conducted interviews ourselves. these interview reports and transcripts included but were not limited to the following: george tenet, director of the cia when the agency took custody and interrogated the majority of detainees, jose rodriguez, director of the cia's counterterro

the cia also misled other cia white house officials. when vice president cheney's council asked cia council general scott muller in 2003 about the cia's videotaping, the waterboarding of detainees, he deliberately told them that videotapes, quote, were not being made. he did not disclose that videotapes of previous waterboarding sessions had been made and still existed. source e-mail from scott muller. there many, many more examples in the committee's report. all are boumted. the third set notes the various ways in which cia management of the program from the inception to the formal termination was inadequate and deeply flawed. there is no doubt that the detention interrogation program was by any measure a major cia undertaking. it raised significant legal and tell us issues and involved significant resources and funding. it was not however managed as a significant cia program. in the custody of the first detainee, the cia had not identified and prepared a suitable detention site. it had not researched effective interrogation techniques

the cia also misled other cia/white house officials. when vice president cheney's counsel, david addington, ex-cia counsel scott muller in 2003 about the cia's videotaping the waterboarding of detainees, muller deliberately told him that videotapes, quote, were not being made, end quote. but did not disclose that videotapes of previous waterboarding sessions had been made and still existed. source: e-mail from scott muller dated june 7, 2003. there are many, many more examples in the committee's report. all are documented. the third set of findings and conclusions notes the various ways in which cia management of the detention and interrogation program from its inception to its formal termination in january of '09 was inadequate and deeply flawed. there is no doubt that the detention and interrogation program was, by any measure, a major cia undertaking. it raised significant legal and policy issues and involved significant resources and funding. it was not, however, managed as a significant cia program. instead, it had limited oversigh

knowing what you know now, are you personally comfortable what cia officials, cia contractors did to these detainees? >> i am absolutely comfortable with what cia authorizes people to do and i wouldn't just go through that lengthy report that everyone seems to be pointing to. i'd go through the report that was put out by the republican minority, a shorter report, which is much -- as i understand it and i haven't gone all the way through that one -- but it's much easier to read. it starts from the things that are in this report and points out how much is wrong in there. i'd also look at the cia rebuttal put out yesterday. which has gotten far too little notice. and i would go to our website, ciasavedlives.com where we put up lots of documents never before seen by the public. some of them only recently declassified, formerly top secret documents, which show that the program was authorized, it was legal and it was effective. >> but if you go through this report and you read some of the disgusting details of what were done to these human beings -- they may have been al qaeda detainees, s

where does that leave the cia? >> i think one thing the former officials will tell you is that the cia may not have briefed the president before 2006, but they had briefed the national security advisers, steve hadley, cons le condoleeza rice and it's not normal for the cia to brief on the very detailed things we're seeing here. that they believe, the former officials, that they had met the requirement by briefing the national security adviser, who in turn had briefed the president. >> but i don't think that washes. you look at this report and you see a system of management that is clearly not working, richard. you see donald rumsfeld out of the loop. you see cia officers telling we're not going to tell collin powell because this would upset him. you have a management of this program that raises questions about the security process. >> you have a management of a secret program is that is ugly, that people don't to want talk about, that they are deliberately not trying to talk about. by the way, we have the same prog

the cia lied to itself. are going to have to put what they are saying side by side with these official documents. you will have people saying basically making stuff up. i don't think they are honest significant counter veiling on it. when you go through a case by tais with useful actional intelligence it reads like a lawyer's brief. if they dagave them harsh interrogation we don't know if you didn't interrogate them so harshly you would have gotten the name information. what universe isec6g÷ corrobora not at important thing. in journalism do we say we have a source that corroborates it. it is extremely important. it can seem up fair we are told by the doj they could do this stuff. >> twha do the families of the victims think about this new report and findings? we will speak with the man who lost his family in the towers. >> the memory of 9-11 who fore witnessed the greatest single tragedy in all of our home land in recent history. at's new, the bigger, better menu at red lobster! with more of what you love!

so if john brennan and the cia say this right now, you say what? >> well, listen, i agree with bill harlow. the cia obviously has a position on this. they're not making things up. but what we really need to do is see the interrogation reports and compare them with all the other documentation. it may turn out that the cia is right. but right now, this has become too partisan. we're not getting at the truth. and i think it would behoove the cia to make its case just as it's made its case that it didn't go off on this program of enhanced interrogation on its own. it was ordered from the top, approved by the senate and the house. and it should point out why it believes that enhanced interrogation led to the murder of bin laden. >> peter, button this up for us. you're the historian and the scholar. you've gone through the senate intelligence committee report, the minority report, the cia report, but you've also spent more than a decade studying all of this. >> well, hopefully, conversation to be continued because there's a 6,000 page version of this --

we understood what the cia was doing. we gave the cia our bipartisan support.e cia funding to carry out its activities." and now listen to what the former director of the cia's national clandestine service told sean hannity back in 2012. >> you personally briefed nancy pelosi. >> i did. >> about enhanced interrogation. >> we briefed her on 4 september 2002 about the interrogation of abu zubaydah. so we went through the techniques that were used on him, including waterboarding. >> and this wasn't just a courtesy call by the cia. u.s. law requires the cia to inform top congressional leaders about covert activities. one of the ranking members notified was west virginia senator jay rockefeller, an outspoken liberal who after the capture of khalid shaikh mohammed in 2003 said we should be "very, very tough with him" and that we have no business not getting that information. "i wouldn't take anything off the table where he's concerned because this is a man who has killed hundreds ólxx hundreds o americans over the last ten years." senator dianne feinstein, a vocal cr

but the cia agents are angry.rm says they think he has gone rogue. >> again, i improvised for myself. i took control. >> aren't they supposed to be running you rather than you running them? >> in the ideal world, probably, yes. >> bottom line, the cia can't be picky. to locate and eliminate awlaki, they need storm, and they are willing to pay. if his plan works. you get a quarter of a million dollars from the cia when aminah crosses into yemen? >> that's correct. >> after seven weeks, storm sent back to vienna for another meeting with aminah. the next step in the match making. he shows her this video from awlaki. >> this recording is done specifically for sister aminah. the brother who's carrying this recording is a trustworthy brother. >> what's her reaction when she's watching that video? >> she's full of joy and tears. you do really know him, she says. you do really know him. >> i hope you are well. >> then storm has her record a video for awlaki in return. >> my brother, it's me, aminah, and i just want to tel

this is a total breach of trust, the people who oversee the cia and the cia itself.in, i totally see david's point about the timing on this. we know what dianne feinstein did this. but i also think it's a moment where we can as a country take a look at what we're doing and our behavior and understand the fear that drove it and what we ought to be doing going forward. >> david? >> i just don't agree that this is an appropriate time. of course we need to be transparent over time. i think there are time and places where you can do that. when you can have a more rational, calmer conversation. but when you're in the middle of a conflict with people who are beheading their hostages and dressing them up as if they're detainees of americans and want to use this against us. i'm not sure i'd want to play into their hands. so many americans are questioning authority coming out of ferguson and all these race issues. i'm not sure this is a time to put another log on that fire. >> all right, guys. we're going to continue this discussion, full analysis. a lot more of the details. a

the cia led several detainees to believe they would never be allowed to leave cia custody alive. suggesting to him he would only leave in a coffin-shaped box. >> let me begin with evan perez. and we heard the chairman fi feinstein -- you have been poring through all of these pages. i just want to begin with the methods, the methods used to try to get this information. can you just run through some of what that entailed? >> it is the one that the senator just described. called the hard takedown. it involved basically opening the doors to a prison cell. the dungeon as been described in this report. in which the officers, the employees with the cia would run in screaming, yelling, asking the detainee to get down, and then they would grab him, cut off his clothes, pull him outside, drag him across the floor. the detainee would have abrasions to his face, legs and hands according to this report. things like this are -- you know, it's obviously very ugly to read now. even though we've heard so much about what was going on in these sites. it's still very difficult to read, you know, the

the cia today defending the program saying it was effective. were any potential terrorist attacks thwarted? did it help lead the u.s. to find osama bin laden? those questions for two former cia operatives coming up next. sheila! you see this ball control? you see this right? it's 80% confidence and 64% knee brace. that's more... shh... i know that's more than 100%. but that's what winners give. now bicycle kick your old 401(k) into an ira. i know, i know. listen, just get td ameritrade's rollover consultants on the horn. they'll guide you through the whole process. it's simple. even she could do it. whatever, janet. for all the confidence you need. td ameritrade. you got this. and our big idaho potato truck is still missing. so my buddy here is going to help me find it. here we go. woo who, woah, woah, woah. it's out there somewhere spreading the word about americas favorite potatoes: heart healthy idaho potatoes and the american heart association's go red for women campaign. if you see it i hope you'll let us know. always look for the grown in

the cia says that is a lie.ation into who is telling the truth just ahead. >> madame speaker, just to be clear, you're accusing the cia of lying to you. >> yes, misleading the congress of the united states. misleading the congress of the united states. [ female announcer ] hands were made for talking. feet...tiptoeing. better things than the pain, stiffness, and joint damage of moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis. before you and your rheumatologist decide on a biologic, ask if xeljanz is right for you. xeljanz (tofacitinib) is a small pill, not an injection or infusion, for adults with moderate to severe ra for whom methotrexate did not work well. xeljanz can relieve ra symptoms, and help stop further joint damage. xeljanz can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections and cancers have happened in patients taking xeljanz. don't start xeljanz if you have any infection, unless ok with your doctor. tears in the stomach or intestines, low blood cell counts

the cia says that is a lie.tion into who is telling the truth just ahead. >> madame speaker, just to be clear, you're accusing the cia of lying to you. >> yes, misleading the congress of the united states. misleading the congress of the united states. introducing the new philips norelco shaver series 9000 with contour detect technology that flexes in 8 directions for the perfect shave at any angle. go to philips.com/new to save up to $40. innovation and you. philips norelco. --i don't know my credit score. that's really important. i mean - i don't know my credit score. don't you want to buy a house...like, ever? you should probably check out credit karma, it's free. credit? karma? free? credit karma. really free credit scores. ♪ just look at those two. happy. in love. and saving so much money on their car insurance by switching to geico... well, just look at this setting. do you have the ring? oh, helzberg diamonds. another beautiful setting. i'm not crying. i've just got a bit of sand in my eyes, that's all. ge

this is all about the cia, what the cia did. but they are not alone in this. leaders in congress, in both houses, were briefed 17 times from 200 2 to 2005. they knew and this report talks about the cia lying or not -- or concealing evidence to congress. but surely, a lot of folks on the hill knew what was going on. should they also be held responsible here? >> i think so, yes. look, members -- a lot of of the members will say, we were sworn to secrecy, we weren't allowed to saying anything. the problem with that is they have a mechanism to say something. if they believed what they were told was egregious enough they could have gone to the howe house or senate floor and talked about it. they're given immunity if they're on the senate or house floor in almost anything. they could have gone out and raised the alarm bell. they could have done what senator wyden did during hearings on the wiretapping programs where he kept telegraphing there might be something there. we in the media didn't ever pick up on it. he was trying to make the point that there was something

the cia continues to say it. we will never know whether these techniques were necessary to the information. my view, charlie, after having thought about this, that is a bit of a copout. you can say that about anything unpleasant in the u.s.. for example, you can desk the question,, was it necessary for abraham lincoln to suspend habeas corpus to win the civil war? was it necessary for the u.s. to drop atomic bombs on japan? we will never know. of course it is unknowable. the people on the ground believe it was necessary. >> john brennan thinks it is unknowable. >> i think it is politically convenient to say it is unknowable. >> you have to understand the context. the word they use his context. give us a sense of the context. mike hayden is saying, if we had not done these things, and there had been a successful attack six months later, there would be hell to pay. people would have said, why did you not know this? what is the context? >> context is important. >> who is pushing and demanding. >> let me tell you how

cia detention centers. is interesting in this report about those centers is the kind of diplomatic cost of ining cia detention centers another country. often, the ambassadors to those countries were not informed or were only informed after the deal was done. therder to basically buy cooperation of these countries, the u.s. had to offer them wish -- of what they wanted. in one very interesting note in the report, it shows the perverse effect of having a cia detention center, the secretary of state in 2004 ordered a u.s. ambassador in an unnamed country to do marsh the country to ask that country provide for its to the full access international committee of the red cross. of course, at the same time, the u.s. had prisoners in the country who it was keeping secret. obviously, not available to the red cross. final and probably most important point is, i guess, what is not in this report. with onert -- it deals aspect of one part of the detainee mistreatment in the war on terror. it deals with the cia prisoners

the cia under fire.rmer lawyer for the spy agency who signed off on the bush era program that critics now describe as torture. why didn't he keep secretary of state colin powell in the dark? plus, protests back lash. will police try to crack down on daily demonstrations against nypd chokehold case? and stabbing attack. the dramatic video of a terrifying attack in new york city that ended with police opening fire. we want to welcome our viewers in the united states and around the world. i'm wolf blitzer. you're in the situation room. >> a new bulletin warning the terrorists may, repeat, may retaliate against americans in the united states or around the world. this after today's release of an explosive report on cia interrogation of terrorists during the bush administration. democrats on the $senate committee say the tactics were far more brutal than previously revealed and in some cases amounted to torture. the cia is pushing back, calling the program effective. the report is reigniting a debate over terr

any history of the cia detention the history of the cia detention programs, people inabout 100 cia detention. only a third of those were subjected to enhance interrogation. only three were subjected to waterboarding. there are whole bunch of people that you either judge are talking to you without having to resort to enhanced interrogation or not important enough. do not have information you need to probe for. first of all, there are a whole bunch of people who never -- we never had to go there with. there are a bunch of people were where the less harsh techniques worked. that is very important. why did the counterterrorism officers who came to george tenet and suggested these techniques, why did they think these would work? >> were these counterterrorism experts within the cia, or were they hired talent that you are paying $80 million to question mark that is where i am going. the officers who came to george were our officers. why did we think the techniques would work? the contractors, discussed in the media, the contractors who the senate committee says has no experience as interrogators,

i first joined the cia in 1980. over the course of my career, i've come to experience and cia's many the national accomplishments. many of our conscience will not carry out many looking for without praise. those in our workforce are among some best and brightest that our nation has to offer. over the last several days, we have been touched by the outpouring of support, confidence, and pride that her have agues in government expressed -- both publicly and privately. these expressions of kindness and support have been inspiring. his he president said in as americans we owe a profound debt of gratitude to our fellow citizens to keep us safe -- the -- solemn rows of the cia have sacrificed themselves to serve us. the stars are testament to our history, our spirit, and a consistent reminder of the men and women who make sacrifices to help keep our fellow citizens strong. now, i would be happy to you ess questions that might have. >> from the wall street journal -- a two-part question. the first is, did you support the pu

eventually, the cia had realized that they hadn't fixed this. what the cia had done was wrong. wrong. it was a bad idea. it was not only an embarrassment, but they were worried that if they did this again, they were going to continue making mistakes. that might be costly mistakes. so a few years later, the cia had done 1200 plus days of constantly sensory deprivation. the cia conclusion was that that entire operation, including the treatment of him over those 1200 plus days was an abomination. and the cia got rid of that interrogation manual. it's a bad idea. we've tried it. it's a bad idea. there were elements in the cia who wanted to bring the methods back from time-to-time. the cia found out about that officer doing that and disciplined the guy. the cia recommended that that officer be admonished for inappropriate use of interrogation techniques. so yes the temptation is there. but they knew, functionally, it didn't work. in 1988, the c.i.a. deputy director testified that treatment as rejected by the cia, not because it's wrong, but because it has historically proven to be i

there's interesting e-mails in the report from the cia where cia officials went to the white house and said to the white house "hey, are you sure you want to say this? do you know what we're doing? we want to make sure you know what you're doing so if you say we don't torture people you're saying what we think you're saying." and the white house said no problem, go ahead, we know what you're doing. so even though president bush privately expressed discomfort and was privately kept out of the loop, publicly he's maintained support for the program and continues to do so for this day. >> in his book "decision points" doesn't the president say he did approve waterboarding? which if it's true he had some knowledge of what was going on before 2006? >> right, this is interesting, actually. there's a dispute. bushes's memoir said they received some information about the program and approved the information he knew. in john rizzo's book, he was the former acting general counsel of the cia, he said he wasn't sure bush knew what he was talking about so it's not clear what bush knew when and where

cia had info before torture."words, she's saying that there's no positive benefits from the enhanced interrogation, that that information could have gotten in other ways -- what the director of the cia said today, it's possible that they could have gotten it in other ways but that's not knowable. >> she's wrong again. in fact, if you go to the minority study, cia study which is on ciasaveslives.com, you'll find that there was valuable information which was gotten from them. maybe if we had the luxury of time, we might have developed another way of getting this information. we didn't have the luxury of time. whe we had a ticking time bomb situation. >> the nuance is, what brennan says, yes, the u.s. got very valuable information from these detainee who is had been waterboarded or had gone through some of these enhanced interrogation techniques. but they don't know if that information was a result of that so-called torture or if that information was received because some interrogator was playing nice with them and u

the cia led several detainees to believe they would never bee allowed to leave cia custody alive. suggesting to abu zabaydah that he would only leave in a coffin-shaped box. that's a cia cable from august 12, 2002. according to another cia cable cia officers also planned to cremate zubaydah should he notdh survive his interrogation. source, cia cable, july 15, 2002. after the news and photographs emerged from the united states military detention of iraqis at abu ghraib, the intelligence committee held a hearing on the matter on may 12th, 2004. without disclosing any details of its own interrogation program cia director john mcglocklin testified that ciaer interrogationse were nothing lie what was depicted at abu ghraib. the united states prison in iraq where detainees were abused by american personnel. this of course was false. cia detainees at one facility, a described as a dungeon, were kept in complete darkness, constantly shackled in isolated cells, with loud noise or music and only a bucket to use for human waste.ur the u.s. bureau of prisons personnel went to that location i

bush, you know, defending the cia. >> and the cia defending the cia. that's right. the report is -- there is a minority report that was also issued today from the senate republicans with the one exception of susan collins. and it's not just their conclusion that releasing this report puts at harm americans abroad, u.s. troops and cia officers and others. they also take issue with the content of the report. let me read one quote here. they say, basically overall senate democrats' biases led to faulty analysis, serious inaccuracies and misrepresentations of fact. there are people who work under the obama administration for the cia who also dispute much of what is in this report. and we should point out that the cia itself has issued statements today. they're basically taking issue with, first of all, the claim that torture or enhanced interrogation techniques, let's call it what it is, torture. they say it did produce intelligence that helped thwart attack plans. they say it was critical to our understanding of al qaeda and continues to inform our counterterrorism eff

assurances from top cia bosses the senate report says that the cia purposely lied to congress, the white house, and the public. and they lied about the program's effectiveness. >> questioning the detainees in the program has given us information that has saved innocent lives by helping us stop new attacks. >> the report says that's not true. the interrogations did not stop the plots or lead to the capture of any al qaeda operatives, like osama bin laden. the u.s. has banned the use of torture, but not permanently. >> unfortunately, it would be pretty easy for president obama or the next president to ignore the executive actions being taken on torture. because we have seen a huge expansion of presidential authority under presidents bush and obama. >> the president has made it clear that he has no intention of revisiting his decision and prosecuting any of those involved in the program. the cia is denying the allegations. >> wanted objective conclusions it released today contain a disturbing number of factual and analytical errors. >> it seems unlikely congress will push for more details,

director john brennan is defending the cia.y did not approve its tactics in 2013. this is what he told a senate panel just last year. let's listen. >> i was aware of the program, i was cc'd on some of the documents but no oversight and wasn't involved in its creation. i expressed my personal objections and views to some agency colleagues about certain of those eits, such as waterboarding, nudity and others, where i professed my personal objections to it, but i did not try to stop it because it was, you know, something that was being done in a different part of the agency under the authority of others. >> so even he had personal objections to some of the things that they were doing. >> and he also said in response to this report that the interrogation methods helped. look, you and i can argue this back and forth. i'm glad it's out there. let the american people decide. the only point i was making with my commentary yesterday was grow up, america. this is messy. we are fighting animals who would behead you and i, carol. to defeat

and that the cia impeded oversight in the cia inspector general, the white house, and the congress. barack obama responded tonight. >> the findings in the intelligence report were brutal. and it constituted torture. it's not who we are. it's about potential ramifications overseas and we've taken precautionary steps to try to mitigate any additional risks. i think it was important for us to release this so that we can account for it so people understand precisely why i banned these practices as one of the first acts i took when i came to office. >> here's a sample of the details about cia interrogation inclurded in the report. cia detainees, particularly thosed to standing sleep deprivation were routinely placed in diapers. a waste bucket was removed from the cell for punishment according to a cia cable. hazeem requested a bucket in which he could relieve himself but was told all rewards must be earned. they discussed rectal hydration as a means of behavior control. as one officer wrote while iv infusion is safe and effect, we were impressed with the ancillary effectiveness of the re

the cia is pushing back.rs. senator feinstein chair of the senate intelligence committee spoke about the report yesterday on the senate floor in graphic detail. >> detainees were subjected to the most aggressive techniques immediately. stripped naked, diapered, physically struck and put in various painful stress positions for long periods of time. they were deprived of sleep for days. in one case, up to 180 hours. that's 7 1/2 days. over a week with no sleep. the cia led several detainees to believe they would never be allowed to leave cia custody alive. cia detainees at one facility described as a dungeon were kept in complete darkness, constantly shackled in isolated cells with loud noise or music and only a bucket to use. >> there was confusion about how many detainees existed. records showed at least 119. cia officials stated there were fewer than 100. cia records show that former president george w. bush was kept in the dark with his first breeching taking place in 2006, four years after the program bega

records indicate that the first cia briefing for the president on the cia's enhanced interrogation techniques occurred on april 8, 2006. cia records state that when the president was briefed, he expressed discomfort with the image of a detainee chained to the ceiling, clothed in a diaper and forced to go to the bathroom on himself. he wasn't fully briefed for four years. were they trying to keep the president unaware of what was happening? how is it possible for him to authorize something and not even ask for a briefing for four years? >> this is not clear. obviously those allegations raise the prospect that the president may not have been fully aware of the nature of the program or was not fully informed as to its nature. and also the president relied on the memorandum advice and interpretation by his advisers, including secretaries and the cia director. but of course what the senate report also indicates is that all these briefings may have been undercut, or flawed, because the individuals reporting to the president did not themselves have an accurate understanding of what the program entai

did the cia do the right thing did the cia do the right thing or go too far?@oyu0x?x@8p a remote that lives on your phone. more wi-fi in more places. a movie library you can take wherever you go. internet speeds that have gotten faster 13 times in 12 years. the innovators and inventors at comcast labs are creating more possibilities for more people every day. comcast nbcuniversal. bringing media and technology together for you. >>> if one man was at the heart of the enhanced interrogation program it was jose rodriguez. during the years after 9/11 he was the head of the cia counterterrorism program and then ran the national clandestine service. mr. rodriguez joins us to discuss this week's controversy. mr. rodriguez, you were the man who came up with the enhanced interrogation program after all we've heard this week about waterboarding, about confinement in coffin-like spaces, mock executions. any regrets? do you have any second thoughts? >> absolutely not, chris. not one bit. prior to the inte mentation of the enhanced interrogation techniques abu zabada stopped tal

a huge guest for the cia. according to this report, after he was transferred to a site in tieland he was placeed in isolation for 47 days. then the cia launched around the clock interrogation, slamming him into a wall, stuffing him into a coffin side box, and water boarding him until he had -- that continued for 17 days. at one point the waterboarding left him, quote, completely unresponsive with bubbles rising through his open full mouth, unquote. the scene was dramatic, according to crowe memos. some employees who were there were distraught and concerned about the legality of what they had just witnessed. according to these newly released memos other cia employees at this secret site broke down emotionally, crying after witnessing the treatment. the report concludes these tactics did not work. none of them. the head of the senate intelligence committee, dianne feinstein, released at the report under heavy criticism. inard a ford senator feinstein does not, whichikize the actions as torture but by definition

>> this report throws the cia under the bus.rows under the bus all of those people who actually worked so hard to protect the country. my concern is it subjects them to threats from isis, which i think we've already begun to see. it throws under the bus our liaison counterparts. i am just shocked that the united states of america would betray it's liaison counterparts who actually stepped up to the plate to help us after 9/11. this is a serious problem for us and for the intelligence committee. and we're going to pay the price for this. >> when you say pay the price, that leads me to my final question. do you think this is going to make people in the government, in the cia and the people who authorize them, it will make them more timid the next time we face the imminent threat like we faced in the wake of 9/11? >> leaders at the agency are going to wonder if the authorities they received from their president will last longer than one election phase. that's a big concern. we want the cia to be confident that the authorities that

second, the cia misled policy makers and the public on the cia intelligent program.hird, cia managers failed to supervise the program appropriately. and fourth, the program was far more brutal than the cia presented. >> question, what does senator dianne feinstein hope to accomplish by making this report public? >> she hoped to damage the bush administration. but i'll tell you what she did. what she's got here is a pretty vicious attack. it's a vindictive prosecutor's document. she didn't talk to cia people. she didn't talk to the alleged people that did these grizzly things. she talked about things we've known about ten years. she said it was a decade ago. she's dredged this all up. she's damaged our relations with foreign intelligence agencies exposed. she's damaged the reputation of the united states. and for what? we've heard these things! we've heard about waterboarding. we knew all these things! she's got a few grizzly details. john, this is just like after vietnam. the church committee came out and said, look at all these horrible things these american soldier

trial or no trial, the cia has some big names coming to its defense, from former vice president dick cheney who blasted the report on fox news. >> i think it's a terrible piece of work. we did exactly what needed to be done in order to catch those who were guilty on 9/11 and to prevent a further attack and we were successful on both parts. and i think -- >> this report says it was not successful. >> their report is full of crap. >> reporter: to the agency's former director michael hayden. >> what stunned me about the report most is the fact it was written in the way it was written. it is an unrelenting prosecutorial document. >> reporter: both men say the cia is right inserting harsh interrogation techniques like shows shop in the film "zero dark thirty" methods prevented attacks and saved life. but on that crucial question, the white house takes no position. >> it is impossible to know the counter-factual. it's impossible to know whether or not this information could have been obtained using tactics that are consistent with the army field manual or other law enforcement techniques.

these are the communications within the cia as to what happened. can't claim that tying someone to the floor and have them freeze to death is not torture. you can't say 18 times someone is waterboarded. by the way, on waterboarding it began with spanish inquisition. it was done during the philippine war. we tried and hung japanese war criminals for waterboarding americans in world war ii. >> schieffer: here is the thing. the vice president, dick cheney says that these things worked that we had to do it and they worked. do you think they worked? >> that is -- first of all i think we established that it was torture that is the big second question. let me tell you general petraeus, there's no man alive that military leader that i respect more than general petraeus, quote, why we are warriors we are also human beings. if you want information from a detainee you become his best friend and that is what worked for us with our special operators as well as our conventional forces in both owe rook and in afghanistan. i think we should give some weight to gen

when the order came to interrogate these people, he said and the cia leaders said the cia is always leftding the bag, and we will do nothing, nothing that is illegal. we want clear guidance. the guidance provided was the hack job memorandum that came to be known as the torture memo written by a political appointee who clearly doesn't understand the substance of the u.s. constitution and u.s. history which authorized basically that you can do anything which contradicts the constitution, the 8th amendment, uniform of military justice, convention against torture, geneva convention and cia regulations. officers were in a terrible position because the president signed an order saying it was okay for the department of justice to contradict our laws and our oath. >> glenn, three former directors of the cia, they say these tactics provided useful information. the president himself refuses to rule out the possibility that they provided useful information. whether or not it was worth it, that's a different story. what do you say to these people who still think it can be helpful? >> the president -

from cia headquarters. obama let john brennan do that is telling. we really should also acknowledge that there is a lot of dissent in the cia about this program that comes out in the report from a lot of people i spoke to. one of the most striking things about the report in my mind in 2002 during first waterboarding session the first cia prisoner saw these harrowing things saying, they're appalled by what they're watching saying it's not working. response from headquarters is keep doing it. don't question whether it's legal or not. >> schieffer: you know, peggy, everything about this is kind of different when you stop and think about it. the report comes out, head of the committee, diane feinstein, a woman widely respected on both sides of the aisle does one very testy interview with wolf blitzer on cnth then we don't hear another word from her. but when the head of the cia holds this unprecedented news conference, she starts tweeting. what was it, 20-some odd tweets. i've never scenery action quite like th

the cia was asked to do this. they were given authorizations and many people are saying to me privately, now we are being held out to dry. you asked them to do this and now the world is coming down on top of it. the politicians involved, condi, president bush, senior people knew how was being gathered. they are not being mentioned. the military is not being mentioned. this was a dark period and one that a lot of people say we should move beyond. why at this stage are we just dredgeing it up and focusing on the actions. >> some indication or suspicion this may be about scapegoating. >> rewriting history. when you look at this period and i think we are living in a 9/11 era. i hoped that the final parentheses had been put on. unfortunately we are still living in that 9/11 era. when you look back, how are you going to remember this? is it remembered as the president in which the cia in secret while lying to the political leadership beat people to death and did horrible things and didn't get results? that's what today'

in stark language, udall accused the cia of lying. 2 the cia has long -- july overseers of the public and try to hold back evidence, spied on the senate, made. charges against our staff, and lied about torture and the results of torture. and no one has been held to account. they are right now people serving and high-level positions at the agency approved, directed, or committed acts related to the cia's detention and interrogation program. it is bad enough not to prosecute these officials, but to reward or promote them and risk the integrity of the u.s. government to protect them is encumbrance of all. principle. the president needs to purge his a ministration of high-level officials who were instrumental to the development and running of this program. >> as senator udall urges president obama to fire john brennan, udall himself faces calls to take action of his own. the senate findings released last week amount to only a fraction of the full report -- 480 heavily redacted pages out of more than 6,000 pages total. the white house has blocked release of the full report so far, backing

why would aren't you tell the president of the united states that the cia contractors or cia officials were engaged in waterboarding, for example? >> well, because those detail his not been finalized in terms of -- there were still ongoing discussions between the cia and the justice department and again, of course, the president could have asked what those details were at any time and it was my impression based upon hearing various conversations over the next few months and the next few years that in fact, he had some damaknowledge. the level of knowledge i can't comment on. >> but you knew from the very beginning the specific procedures that were under way. the suggestion is that you and andy card and other white house officials and national security adviser condoleezza rice or george tenet, you were trying to protect the president. is that a fair assessment? >> well, it's always our job to protect the president and to ensure that the president has the information that he needs to have in order to effectively run this country. again, the president any time can ask for as much detailed

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 p