tv At This Hour With Berman and Michaela CNN December 9, 2014 8:00am-9:01am PST
>> hello, i'm john berman. michaela pereira is off today. we'd like to welcome our viewers to the united states and around the world. breaking news at this hour. a highly anticipated and extremely controversial report due out any minute details just what cia interrogators did to terror detainees after september 11 and if it worked. any minute now senator dianne feinstein will present this report. you're looking at live pictures of the senate well. the senator will detail tactics and policies used during the bush administration against al qaeda suspects -- waterboarding, sleep deprivations, reservations about secret overseas prisons. the so-called black sites, all that expected to be included. what is in the report is controversial, releasing it at all is controversial. heightened security around the world because of fears the
report could spark anti-american violence. evan perez has a preview of what's in the report. also, dana bash who just spoke with senator dianne feinstein. senior white house correspondent jim acosta, pentagon correspondent barbara starr and with us from cairo where there are security concerns is ian lee. first, we want to go to evan perez with a look at what this report will say. good morning, evan. >> good morning, john. there's no doubt this is going to be a really ugly day for the cia. this report has been fought over for years now. for the last few months the cia has been working with the white house and with the senate to try to decide what to release in this report. the findings are going to be really ugly in the sense that we're going to learn a lot more about what went on in this program. we know for a fact that there's going to be more information about the detainees, what they were subjected to. we also know that the report will portray the cia as going
beyond what the methods that were authorized by memos that were done by the justice department and that it misled, according to the democrats who did this report, that it misled the justice department, misled the white house, and misled congress about what it was doing with the detainees. we expect we'll get details about detainee deaths that occurred while if this program and overall it's going to portray the cia as mismanaging this program and didn't produce much intelligence according to the democrats and, in fact, the big question is did this program help find osama bin laden. as you know he was killed in a u.s. raid. that's going to be still in dispute when the day is done. we expect that the cia will produce its own report, john, that will say that it did, indeed, provide intelligence that led to the capture or to the finding of bin laden. the senate democrats are going to say that it did not. so that's what we're going to have at the end of the day.
probably much in dispute about this program. >> indeed. divisive to say the least. as one senator put it this morning, this report will say the cia did use torture and it didn't work and now evan you are reporting that this report will also say the cia was misleading to federal officials as well. we'll check back with you as you get more details of what's inside the report. i want to go to dana bash, our chief congressional correspondent. at the center of this whole something senator dianne feinstein. she will be speaking on the senate floor any minute. it's really senator feinstein who has decided and pushed for the release of the report today. you just spoke with her. >> that's right. as you know we've been reporting all morning about the fact that military personnel,'m boosy personnel and other u.s. personnel around the world are on high alert because of the fear of repercussions from the
release of this report. so i just caught up with the senator, the chairwoman of the intelligence committee as she was going from her office to the senate floor where she'll give her speech and i asked her about that. how do you respond to those who worry that releasing this will put american lives at risk? >> well, i'll respond to that in my remarks. . there really is no good time and i think the greatness of this country is that we can examine mistakes and remedy them. and that is the hallmark of a great and just society so anything can happen at any time without a report. there's no question about that. and there will be a very good chance that because of the change in the senate, the report will not do anything. >> reporter: so you're doing this because you're going to lose the chairmanship? >> not necessarily.
>> reporter: or because democrats are going to lose control? >> no, but there that's obviously a factor. there are a lot of factors that you weigh. this hasn't been an easy decision to move ahead and i'll make that clear. >> just to button that, we should remind our viewers that as of likely this thursday when the lame duck session is over democrats will effectively not have control, republicans don't formally take control until january but there won't be any business done so that was what the senator was referring to is that this is her chance, her last chance as chairwoman of the committee. she referred, john, to the fact that this hasn't been easy. boy is that an understatement. this has been years in the making. the senator and the intelligence committee, mostly on the democratic side, have been very much pushing for information. there has been a lot of controversy, tension about it. there have been accusations from senator feinstein herself about the cia hacking into senate commuters. it's, again, not been easy and she is no dove. she is very hawkish but she
feels this is important to do as others have said because we're not north korea, we're not russia, we are a transparent society and this is why it's important. >> dana, there's been out and out acrimony between the committee and cia which is something you almost never see. dana bash, thanks so much again. we are waiting to hear from senator dianne feinstein the chair of the senate select committee on intelligence. she will be revealing new details about what is in this highly an patriotanticipated controversial report, called the cia torture report, what went on after september 11 to get information from terror detainees. i want to go to the white house. jim adocosta is there. jim, president obama, then senator obama ran largely on releasing the details of what went on. he was adamantly opposed to it as a candidate. now that he's been president for a number of years it is much more complicated. >> it is much more complicated
and it would be interesting to do a then and now because i think they see more grays at the white house. make no mistakes, when president obama came into office in 2009 one of his first executive orders was to ban these so-called enhanced interrogation techniques which included waterboarding which, by the way, arizona senator john mccain, president obama's republican rival in 2008, he has referred to waterboarding as torture. the president in recent years has said we tortured some folks. so there's no dispute as to where the president stands on this. however we should point out and dana was talking about that somewhat. in the last several days you have noticed a hesitation on the part of this administration and that they knew this would be problematic in terms of releasing these results. we should point out that just yesterday the intelligence community after vetting and reviewing the intelligence committee's report returned that back to congress, returned that
become to feinstein so she could release this redacted version and according to an administration official i talked to last night, john, this is 93% unredacted so there are some redactions in this 600-page executive summary of this 6,000 page report but according to the official nothing will be lost in the narrative. so there is going to be some detail here that perhaps the american people haven't seen before. but the chief complaint, the chief, i guess, technique in all of this that is really objected to by a lot of democrats is this use of waterboarding. it was used extensively on a number of detainees during the bush administration. president bush, vice president dick cheney when they were in office they maintained over and over again that this was not torture. president obama came into office and that's what happens when presidents change parties. when a president coming into office he can do what he wants to do when it comes to conducting war and peace and the
president decided he was going to ban these techniques. make mo no mistake, i think this is a very difficult decision for white house to release this information. not only because of the unforeseen consequences that you might see around the world, violence, attacks and so forth, but keep in mind this president won't be in office much longer. he'll be gone in two years. the next president can come along from a different party and go back and decide and review what happened during this administration, drone attacks and so forth, so it does set a precedent and i think makes this administration a little uneasy, john. >> jim acosta, stick around. we will want the white house reaction when senator dianne feinstein, the chair of the senate intelligence committee, is due to speak in any minute. she will reveal new details of what's in the report. you heard jim mention it. waterboarding, the enhanced interrogation techniques that were used to get information from terror detainees after september 11 during the bush administration. again, the details of what is in that report will be released any minute. but even before those details
are released, the report is controversial and all around the world u.s. marines have been asked to be on a heightened state of alert to respond if there are any protests or violence directed at americans because of this report. i want to bring in our pentagon correspondent barbara starr to give us details about 24 heightened security. barbara? >> john, good morning. the pentagon may make the case that much of this has been out there in the press in recent years, that the world knows an awful lot about this. but not really, because starting last week an order came from the joint chiefs of staff, general martin dempsey, the chairman, out to the worldwide combatant commanders to be ready when the report is released. the concern is a lot of material may appear online now. it will be read around the world. whether it is accurate, ink context or propaganda put out y
about the cia by isis, there may be -- may be -- violent repercussions. the concern is u.s. embassies, u.s. military bases around the world, u.s. troops in afghanistan, in iraq, in the middle east. so what has happened since last week is u.s. marine which is basically run the emergency response forces in africa and in the middle east have been put on this heightened state of alert. they are now ready to go faster than ever before if a violent situation was to break out. look, let's be clear. the pentagon, the white house, congress, everybody hopes it does not happen. but it has happened in the past. u.s. embassies have come under attack and, of course, ever recalls the situation with the u.s. government compound in benghazi, libya. that is what they are trying to avoid. a violent backlash that the military could not be ready to respond to so these marines now on alert, ready to move if something were to happen. john? >> on alert and ready to move.
one place you can bet the united states has its eye on right now, thanks, barbara starr, one place the united states no doubt has its eye on is cairo. cairo, of course, it was site of violent demonstrations after the video many people saw as anti-islam, the u.s. embassy in cairo came under attack there. i want to check in with ian lee in cairo to give us a sense of what precautions are being taken and if there is concern and visible concern that you can see there today. ian? >> john, i had a conversation with the u.s. embassy and they're telling me they won't comment on just procedures. in 2012 there was a breaching of the perimeter by anti-american demonstrators, the breaching of the u.s. embassy perimeter since then rts, security has been stepped up, there's more barriers, a larger police presence and the military is close by if needed. but when we talk about the
street and the genre action, there's mild interest, not very much what we're hearing that people are saying. where the real damning reports could come from are egypt, for example, was one of the cia's rendition program. if they are mentioned this could be embarrassing for the government and as well for their intelligence community. we haven't heard any reaction from the egyptian governments yet but we're also waiting to see what are in the details. if something is very explosive in this report, then that could -- we could see the effect of that in the street. john. >> ian lee in cairo. yes, the details so important, what is in this report. and any minute now we will hear from dianne feinstein, senator, the chairperson of the senate select committee on intelligence. it's that committee that is releasing this report that talks about what they call cia terror
techniques that were used to get information from terror suspects after the attacks on september 11. what will the details be? what will the reaction be and what will the accusations be about? how they were presented or misrepresented to the u.s. government. stay with us. that speech very controversial just ahead. i lost my sight in afghanistan, but it doesn't hold me back. i go through periods where it's hard to sleep at night, and stay awake during the day. non-24 is a circadian rhythm disorder that affects up to 70% of people who are totally blind. talk to your doctor about your symptoms and learn more by calling 844-844-2424. or visit my24info.com.
dad,thank you mom for said this oftprotecting my future.you. thank you for being my hero and my dad. military families are uniquely thankful for many things, the legacy of usaa auto insurance could be one of them. if you're a current or former military member or their family, get an auto insurance quote and see why 92% of our members plan to stay for life.
♪ come in and use your starbucks gift card any day through january 5th for a chance to win starbucks for life. ensure active heart health. i maximize good stuff, like my potassium and phytosterols which may help lower cholesterol. new ensure active heart health supports your heart and body so you stay active and strong. ensure, take life in. wouldn't it be great if hiring plumbers, carpenters shopping online is as easy as it gets. and even piano tuners were just as simple?
thanks to angie's list, now it is. we've made hiring anyone from a handyman to a dog walker as simple as a few clicks. buy their services directly at angieslist.com no more calling around. no more hassles. start shopping from a list of top-rated providers today. angie's list is revolutionizing local service again. visit angieslist.com today. welcome back to our viewers in the united states and around the world. any minute now, senator dianne feinstein, the chair of the senate select committee on intelligence, will give a speech on the senate floor outlining her committee's report on what is being call cda torture techniques.
how they question terror suspects after september 11 during the bush administration, what these techniques were, whether they were effective and now we have just learned also how they were represented to the administration and the government at the time. again, that speech any second but the report just posted online. we have the details of what it says. i'm going to go to our justice correspondent evan perez. evan, it says the techniques were not effective and not only that it says what they were doing, the cia, was misrepresented to the government at the time. >> that's right, john. as i mention, this is going to be dark for the cia because all along they've said this program produced valuable intelligence. this report that's been done by the senate democrats which looksed at six million pages of documents in the cia is concluded otherwise.
the senate found there were at least 119 prisoners who went through the cia program that's a bigger number than we have ever known. the cia has previously only said about 100. we know a third of them were suggest to what the cia called enhanced interrogation tactics, eits, this is what people call torture. waterboarding, slapping b, sleep deprivation. other thing s things we know so prisoners died as a result of these tactics. led me read to you the main finding from the senate. that the enhanced interrogation did not produce otherwise unavailable information necessary to save lives. that's something the cia will push back very hard on because they believe that -- people in the bush administration and the cia -- believe this program did save lives. they say it's a program they disavowed. that they would never do this again and that it was wrong but
they can't they say you cannot say it produced valuable intelligence and that it's unknowable whether it would have been gotten otherwise. as you mentioned, the findings are that the program was ineffective. that the cia misled the white house, it misled congress and the justice department about what it was doing. that the program was far more brutal in the tactics being used against these detainees. we know one detainee at one location died after he was held naked for days chained to a wall and that -- he died of hypothermia, for example. so that's another finding in this report. we also are told from the report that the program produced inaccurate information. it led to the fbi and the cia having to chase down leads that turned out to be nothing because people misread information, because, for example, khalid
sheikh mohammed, while he was being waterboarded, admitted to things that the cia wanted him to admit to which turned out to be false and not true. so, again, these are some very ugly findings that we expect. we have a bunch of people here at cnn poring over the details of this report. we'll expect to have some more. >> evan, stick around. we want to welcome our viewers in the united states and around the world. we are getting the details of what is inside the senate intelligence committee report on cia techniques to get information from terror suspects during the bush administration evan perez outlined what the techniques were, harsher than what the situation was told at the time. misrepresented, evan just reported to the administration at the time. evan also inside this report there is an open question about what the cia was telling the president. whether the president, in fact, knew what the cia was doing at some of these black sites. >> that's right, john. that's something i think we're going to end the day here without really knowing the full
answer. we know that president bush in his own biography says that he knew full well what was going on. he was in control and he authorized this program. we know that the justice department authorized this program. however. the cia documents don't indicate that he was ever briefed until 2006. so while a lot of the abuses that are described in this report are going on, 2002, 2003, 2004, the president was not being briefed. we know that at some point the cia was preparing to brief some of the top officials in the bush administration but then they decided not to in part because according to some of the documents they were afraid that it was going to leak and in particular the colin powell would blow his lid is what i think one description of this the way how this was described in reaction to what was being done. >> to be clear, president george w. bush in an interview can w candy karolyi made it clear he
stands behind what the cia did and what happened during his administration. vice president dick cheney very publicly as well. evan, stick around. i want to go to our chief correspondent dana bash. already i can see republicans lashing out at this report. some republicans where you are are calling it fiction. >> that's right. and you just saw senators were voting. our team is talking to senators while they're coming off of the senate floor. one of whom is senator richard brr. he is going to be the next chair of the senate intelligence committee, the next dianne feinstein, if you will. republican. he called it fiction. he told our ted barrett that he does not believe that this is an accurate portrayal of what really went on because he says that the committee and its staff didn't interview everybody involved, the operatives in particular. he said that they got their facts wrong and it went on from
there. it's no secret that most of the republicans on the intelligence committee did not like this, did not cooperate and they're going to have their own kind of rebuttal report, if you will. so that is exactly the kind of thing that we are hearing. not just concern about the fact that this information is being released and what it could mean for the security of americans but questioning the actual content of this report in general. >> dana bash, thanks so much. i want to go to the white house. they, of course, are watching very closely what is happening on capitol hill and we are awaiting a speech any minute now from senator dianne feinstein, the chair of the senate select committee on intelligence. jim acosta at the white house. the link to the report is posted. the cia has had days to look at it already. what is their official response now that it's been posted. >> well, there is a response from the president to this report that's being released by the senate intelligence committee, john, and it is pretty scathing, i have to tell you. at the beginning of this statement the president says that he understands that the
previous administration, the bush administration, had agonizing choices to make but that some of the choices they made were "contrary to our values." and then the president goes on to say about this enhanced interrogation technique program and about the report, it says "the report documents a troubling program involving enhanced interrogation techniques on terrorism suspects in secret facilities outside the united states and it reinforces my long-held view that these harsh methods were not only inconsistent with our values as a nation, they did not serve our broader counterterrorism efforts or our national security interesting. moreover, these techniques did significant damage to america's standing in the world and made it harder to pursue our interests with allies and partners. john, we should mention that the cia has also released its own response to this senate intelligence committee report and it also in a statement from the cia director john brennan says that they did not always
live up to their values at the agency in carrying out this program. so it is a -- as e van said, a dark day for the cia and at the same time the white house will be doing a lot of explaining. at the same time, because it took years for this to come to light the white house will face question about why it took so long. >> it's a scathing report from one administration about the previous administration. jim, what is the white house response about whether president obama has spoken to former president george w. bush about this? >> they have had dealings over the years. we don't know whether or not president obama and president obama have talked about this. my sense of it is that they have
not. but this is an interesting question for this president because as we were saying earlier, john, you know, president obama came into office seeing things in a black-and-white fashion. when it came to this program and over the years as he's had to wage for what the war on terrorism and as he tried to wind it down and now he's ratcheting it back up again and the war on isis, he is finding that he also has to do things that perhaps might make people crazy on capitol hill. in terms of snooping on americans, the surveillance going nonthis country and around the world. so those are tactics and programs and thing this president has done that make civil libertarians tear their hair out and might have made a former senator obama tear his hair out when he was running for president in 2008.
so it's interesting to see how they've tried to get this information out there. knowing there could be ramification once it makes its way around the world, john? jim acosta at the white house, stand by. i want to bring back evan perez who has been going through this report which has just been released. evan, in addition to outlining the details of what techniques were used and where they were used, one of the most scathing claims is the cia misrepresented what they were doing to policymakers and the american public. can you give my specifics about what exactly they said and didn't say and the extent of these misrepresentations? >> if you look at this program, it was authorize bid this president. >> i van, i'm sorry, i need to cut you off, senator dianne feinstein, the chair of the senate select committee presenting the report right now.
>> the senate intelligence committee's five and a half year review of the cia's detention and interrogation program which was conducted between 2002 and 2009 is being released publicly. the executive summary which is going out today is backed by a 6,700 page classified and unredacted report with 38,000 footnote which is can be released if necessary at a later time. the report released today examines the cia's secret overseas detention of at least 119 individuals and the use of coercive interrogation techniques, in some cases amounting to torture. over the past couple of weeks, i've gone through a great deal of intro special election about whether to delay the release of this report to a later time.
this clearly is a period of turmoil and instability in many parts of the world. unfortunately, that's going to continue for the foreseeable future. whether this report is released or not. there are those who seize upon the report and say "see what the americans did?" and they will try to use it to justify evil actions or incite more violence. we can't prevent that. but history will judge us by our commitment to a just society governed by law and the willingness to face an ugly truth. and say never again. there may never be the right time to release this report. the instability we see today won't be resolved in months or years but this report is too important to shelve indefinitely.
there there has been a campaign of mistaken statements and press articles launched against the report before anyone has had the chance to read it. as a matter of fact, the report is just now as i speak being released. this is what it looks like. senator chambliss asked me if we could have the minority report bound with the majority report. for draft that is not possible but in the final draft it will be bound together. but this is what the summary of the 6,000 pages look like. my words give me no pleasure. i'm releasing this report because i know there are thousands of employees at the cia who do not condone what i will speak about this morning and who worked day and night
long hours, within the law, for america's security in what is certainly a difficult world my colleagues on the intelligence committee and i am proud of them, just as everyone in this chamber is. and we will always support them. in reviewing this study this in the past few days, with a decision looming over the public release, i was struck by a quote found on page 126 of the executive summary. it cites the former cia inspector general john held gerson who in 2005 wrote the following to the then-director of the cia which clearly states the situation with respect to this report years later as well. and i quote. "we have found that the agency over the decades has continued to get itself intoes mes related to interrogation programs for
one overriding reason. we do not document and learn from our experience. each generation of officers is left to improvise anew with problematic results for our offices as individuals and for our agency. i believe that to be true. i agree with mr. helgerson. his comments are true today but this must change. on march 11, 2009, the committee voted 14-1 to begin a review of the cia's detention and interrogation program. over the past five years, a small team of committee investigators pored over the more than 6.3 million pages of cia records the leader spoke about to complete this report or what we call the study. it shows that the cia's actions
a decade ago are a stain on our value and history. the release of this 500 page summary cannot remove that stain. but it can and does say to our people and the world that america is big enough to admit when it's wrong and confident enough to learn from its mistakes. releasing this report is an important step to restore our valuings and show the world that we are in fact a just and lawful society over the next hour, i'd like to lay out for the senators and the american public the report's findings and. when i complete this, i asked that senator mccain berecognized. before i get to the substance, i'd like to make a few comments about why it's so important that we make this study public.
all of us have vivid memories of that tuesday morning when terror struck new york, washington, and pennsylvania. september 11, 2011, war was declared on the united states. terrorists struck our financial center. they struck our military center and they tried to strike our political center and would have had brave and courageous passengers not brought down the plane. we still vividly remember the mix of outrage and deep despair and sadness as we watched from washington. smoke rising from the pentagon. the passenger plane lying in a pennsylvania field. the sound of bodies hitting canopies as innocents jumped
from the world trade center. mass terror that we often see abroad had struck us directly from our front yard, killing 3,000 innocent men, women, and children. what happened? we came together as a nation with one singular mission -- bring those who committed these rackets to justice. but it's at this point where the values of america come into play, where the rule of law and the fundamental principles of right and wrong become important. in 1990, the united states senate ratify it had convention against torture. the convention makes clear that this ban against torture is absolute. it says, and i quote "no exceptional circumstances whatsoever," including what i just read. "whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political instability or any
other public emergency may be invoked as a justification for torture." nonetheless it was argued that the need for information on possible additional terrorist plots after 9/11 made extraordinary interrogation techniques necessary. even if one were to set aside all of the moral arguments, our review was a meticulous and detailed examination of records. it finds that coercive interrogation techniques did not produce the vital otherwise unavailable intelligence the cia has claimed. i will go into further detail on this issue in a moment, but let me make clear, these comments are not a condemnation of the cia as a whole. the cia plays an incredibly
important part in our nation's security. and has thousands of dedicated and talented employees. what we have found is that a surprisingly few people were responsible for designing, carrying out and managing this program. two contractors led the interrogations. there was little effective oversight. analysts on occasion gave operational orders that interrogations and cia management of the program was weak and diffused. our final report was approved by a bipartisan vote of 9-6 in december, 2012, and exposed brutality in stark contrast to our values as a nation. this effort was focused on the
actions of the cia from late 2001 to january of 2009. the report does not include considerable detail on the cia's interactions with the white house. -- it does including, excuse me, considerable detail on the cia's interactions with the white house, the departments of justice, state, defense, and the senate intelligence committee. the review is based on contemporaneous records and documents during the time the program was in place and active. now, these documents are important because they aren't based on recollection. they aren't based on revision and they aren't a rationalization a decade later. it's these documents referenced repeatedly in thousands of footnotes that provide the factual basis for the study's
conclusions. the committee's majority staff reviewed more than 6.3 million pages of these documents provided by by the cia as well as records from other departments and agencies. these records include finished intelligence assessments, cia operational and intelligence cables, memoranda, e-mails, realtime chat sessions, inspector general reports, testimony before congress, pictures, and other internal records. it's true we didn't conduct our own interviews, and let me tell you why that was the case. in 2009 there was an ongoing review by department of justice special prosecutor john durham. on august 24, attorney general holder expanded that review.
this occurred six months after our study had begun. durham's original investigation of the cia's destruction of interrogation videotapes was broadened to include possible criminal actions of cia employees in the course of cia detention and interrogation activities. at the time, the committee's vice chairman, kit bond, withdrew the minority's participation in the study citing the attorney general's expanded investigation as the reason. the department of justice refused to coordinate its investigation with the intelligence committee's review. as a result, possible interviewees could be subject to additional liability if they were interviewed and the cia, citing the attorney general's investigation. would not instruct its employees
to participate in interviews. notwithstanding this, i am really confident of the factual accuracy and comprehensive nature of this report for three reasons. first, it's the 6.3 million pages of documents reviewed and they reveal records of actions as those actions took place, not through recollections more than a decade later. second, the cia and cia's senior officers have taken the opportunity to explain their views on cia detention and interrogation 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 the 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 some reis of interviews of those directly engaged in detention and interrogation operations. this 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 tenant, director of the cia when the agency took custody and interrogate it had majority of detainees.
jose rodriguez direct o of the cia's counterterrorism center, a key player in the program. cia general council scott muller, cia deputy director of operations, cia acting general council john riz 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. then on september -- december 7, 2007, the "new york times" reported that cia personnel in 2005 had destroyed videotapes of the interrogation of two cia
detainees. the cia's first detainee, abu a buy da -- souix bayda. days later, on december 11, 2007, the committee held a hearing on the destruction of the videotapes. director hayden, the primary witness, testified that the cia had concluded that the destruction of videotapes was acceptable in part because congress had not yet requested to see them. my source is our committee's transcript, december 11, 2007. director hayden stated that if the committee had asked for the videotapes they would have been provided by but of course the committee had not known the videotapes existed. and we now know from cia e-mails
and records that the videotapes were destroyed shortly after cia attorneys raised concerns that congress might find out about the tapes. in any case at that same december 11 committee hearing, director hayden told the commit teal that cia cables related to the interrogation sessions depicted in the videotapes were, and i quote, "a more than adequate representation of the tapes and therefore if you want them, we'll give you access to them." that's our transcript, december 11, 2007 hearing. senator rockefeller, then chairman of the committee, designated two members of the committee staff to review the cables describing the interrogation sessions of abu
zubaida and al nashiri. senator bond similarly directed two of his staffers to review the cables. the designated staff members completed their review and compiled a summary of the content of the cia cables by early 2009 by which time i had become chairman. the description in the cables of cia's interrogations and the treatment of detainees pressed a starkly different picture from director hayden's testimony before the committee. they described brutal around-the-clock interrogations, especially of abu zubaida in which multiple coercive techniques were used in combination and with substantial reputation. it was an ugly, visceral description. the summary also indicated that
abu zubaida did not provide the kind of intelligence that led the cia to stop terrorist plots or arrest additional suspects. as a result, i think it's fair to say the entire committee was concerned and it approved the scope of an investigation by a vote of 14-1 and the work began. in my march 11, 2014, floor speech about the study, i described how, in 2009, the committee came to an agreement with the new cia director, leon panetta, for access to documents and other records about the cia's detention and interrogation program. so i won't repeat that here. from 2009 to 2012 our staff conducted a massive and unprecedented review of cia
recor records. draft sections of the report were produced by late 2011 and shared with the full committee. the final report was completed in . and approved by the committee by a bipartisan vote of 9-6. after that vote, i sent the full report to the president and asked the administration to provide comments on it before it was released. six months later, in june of 2013, the cia responded. i directed them that if the cia pointed out any error in our report, we would fix it. and we did fix one bullet point that did not impact our findings and conclusions. if the cia came to a different conclusion than the report did, we would note that in the report and explain our reasons for disagreeing if we disagree.
and you will see some of that documented in the footnotes of that executive summary as well as in the 6,000 pages. in april 2014, the committee prepared an updated version of the full study and voted 12-3 to declassify and release the executive summary, findings and conclusions and minority and additional views. on august 1, we received a declassified version from the executive branch. it was immediately apparent that the redactions to our report prevented a clear and understandable reading of the study and prevented us from substantiating the findings and 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 redactions to the report. we have been able to include some more information in the report today without sacrificing sources and methods of our -- or our national security. i'd 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 a that the redactions amount to 7% of the bulk of the report. >> without objection. >> thank you, mr. president. this has been a long process. the work began seven years ago when senator rockefeller directed the committee staff to review the cia cables describing
the cables of abu zubaydah 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 in the 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 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 led to believe. the first findings talk about the effectiveness or lack there of and found that the coercion 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. the study concludes that both claims are inaccurate. the report is very specific in how it evaluates the cia's claims on the effect i haveness and necessity of its enhanced infair gags techniques. specifically, we used the cia's own definition of effectiveness as ratified and approved fts office of the legal counsel counsel. they claim that it was necessary to obtain, quote, otherwise available, end quote, 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. these include cases of terrorist plots stopped or terrorist captured. the cia used these examples in presentation to the white house, in testimony to congress, in subfigures missions to the department of justice and ultimately to the american people. some of the claims are well known. the capture of khalid sheikh mohammed and the takedown of osama bin lad d osama bin ladin. 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's coercive techniques. and that information led to specific counterterrorism success. our staff reviewed every one of the 20 cases. and not a single case holds up. in every single one of these cases, at least one of the following was true. one, the intelligence community had information separate from the use of uits that led to the terrorist disruption or capture. two, information from a detainee subjected to eits played no roles in the claimed disruption or capture and, three, the purported terrorist plot either did not exist or posed no real threat to americans or united
states interests. some critics have suggested the study concludes that no intelligence was ever provided for any detainee the cia held. that is false. and the study makes no such claim. what is true that actionable intelligence that was, quote, otherwise unavailable, otherwise unavailable was not obtained using these coercive interrogation techniques. the report also chronicles where the techniques that do not involve physical force were effective. specifically, the report provides examples where they confront detainees with facts. know when they were lying and when 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 group, that these techniques produced good intelligence. let me make a few other comments on the claimed effectiveness of the cia interrogations. at no time did the cia coercive interrogation techniques lead to the collection of intelligence on an imminent threat that many believe was the justification for 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 new detainees
were lying. other times the cia acted on false information, diverting resources and leading officers or contractors to falsely believe they were acquiring unique or actionable intelligence and then the interrogation were working when they were not. internally cia officers often called into question the effectiveness of the cia's interrogation techniques noting how the techniques failed to illicit detainee cooperation or produce accurate information. the report includes numerous examples of cia officers questioning the agency's claims but these contradictions were marginalized and not presented externally. the second set of findings and conclusions is that the cia