And a fifth is education on jefferson organizing so keep coming and we will solve each problem step by step. [laughter] books will be the authors will be signing the books in the lobby. Now on booktv after words the former cia and nsa director provides an inside look at national security. Hes interviewed by James Woolsey the former fbi director and the clinton administration. Host general hayden, first of all, very fine book, enjoyed it a lot. Going to start right off with a couple of interesting chapters in the middle. One about pittsburgh and your history of growing up there in the same neighborhood for many years and the other about your family and what its like to have family and in the fbi. I thought you might want to see just a word about those before we jump into things like metadata and the rest. First of all, thank you. I didnt have a chapter on me in the book. I kind of have the manuscript with penguin, the publishers and said what about you. So i put one together. They suggest i put it near the end, its not a dark and stormy night or anything. Its tied to the speech i gave at the university in 2007 after i was director and cia to the graduating class which is my alma mater. I used to pick it off of my experience and how i brought that with me to the cia. I mentioned in the book i was in the air force before i was in a classroom that didnt have a crucifix in it. Wonderful, broad, culturally based, historically based education which was kind of values based from the school to the Catholic High School to Ten University and of Course University and of course from my parents and it was in pittsburgh which you know as well as i kind of a bluecollar town even though it has a white collar economy it still has a bluecollar culture. I quote an article by the famous world war ii correspondent before he was somebody and before the war he was traveling to the United States had visited pittsburgh, wrote an article that is pinned to a Bulletin Board on one of those just across from downtown pittsburgh and he characterizes the city masterfully, 1939, 1940 this place just goes to work. Thats what brought me, thats what i brought to the job at the cia. Host i want to link to a subject you deal with more than once in which is dominated in many aspects of the debate on intelligence in recent years and that is metadata. It used to be the case back when people just wrote letters in longhand and put stamps on them there was something that would let the government told the post office if you see anything coming to woolsey were coming from, we want to keep track of the address and the return address and the post script and the date. And then presumably if they saw him getting a lot of mail from a mafia figure they would take further steps. It strikes me that both you deal with early in the book its something you dont with right at the beginning of your time at the nsa and with respect to edward thereve been a lot of misunderstandings of people thinking that when you were keeping track of the outside of the envelope with it as a letter or an email they are also reading the message and people got very scared and worried about that. Can you help clear up whats going on . Guest there is so much to be said about that and youre right to public got stampeded into the pockets corner of the room after the story came out. There was a lot about that on the press. Frankly we should embrace a lot of that responsibility ourselves. We probably could have been more forthcoming and we should have been far more agile telling our story and explaining what it is we were doing but to look at the elements as you described, the metadata is the outset outside of the envelope for electronic communication and as you said, american Law Enforcement traditionally has been able to look at the outside of the envelope. The court decided that the fact of the phone call, who you called and when and for how long also was essentially the outside of the envelope. A very fundamental case smith versus maryland the court held five to court held five toko free just like the outside of the envelope that there was no expectation of privacy and therefore it wasnt constitutionally protected. So, when we gathered all of that data after the federal program to be fair, congress then limited access to the metadata in the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act but it wasnt constitutionally limited, it was limited by statute. After 9 11, the president using his article to commanderinchief authorities decided that to the degree of the statute stopped the commanderinchief from doing that, the statute had to be unconstitutional because it was limiting his inherent article and by the way that stood up in court on two locations. The court said we take it as a given they have that constitutional the constitutional authority. So we gathered the data. How constitutionally he could have gone along with it but out of respect for american privacy, we didnt. We gathered at the data and we put it into for the want of a better term in lockbox where it was just riding along there and we didnt try to create relationships or run algorithms against it for anything which is common practice in business. All we did is when we got knowledge of what he called a dirty number, weve never seen this before but this one is really worrisome, i wonder if that the phone has ever called the United States. We get to go and say anybody who talked to this phone in yemen and they raise their hand and say well, once a week we then get to say who did you talk to and jim, i have now completed my explanation of the program under the federal land. Thats all we did. Now theres kind of a nervousness out there among the far left of the political spectrum. I dont know if if theyve used it or not i just dont want the government having the ability to abuse it. Host no good deed goes unpunished and had you pushed your authorities to the ultimate legal possibility it might have gotten less of an angry reaction i am on a panel at aspen. Keith alexander is with me and eric schmidt from google. We are talking about this and he says what he doesnt understand how powerful it is you can run algorithms against it and relationships and it goes on and on. He says thats all true but we dont do that. All we get to to say that any of do this they did any of the numbers call that one sex host no one believes me when i said in the middle that google and amazon particularly together a long with some other Companies Like this now a lot more about you and what you buy and what sites you visit and so forth. Guest than co. Than the public discussion got worse. I would say consistently even after someone may try to explain this have tried to explain this to them they would say consistently if they really get interested in whos calling that number they can simply get the content of the call and my explanation is that as a violation of the law in the United States and of the physics. You cant do that. Its not possible. Host let me turn you to another subject of waterboarding ive been in many discussions about this and im curious to your be used and you make them cleaner but not precisely clear in the buck. Navy seals and special forces, many of them, perhaps most are waterboarding as a part of their training. Guest when i came to the cia my deputy was a former navy seal. Host theres that and also the case that some journalists and authors back during the peak interest in this couple years ago had themselves water board of board of the city could write better articles for magazines and so forth. Now, to test for torture isnt simple and clear but i dont know any other things called torture by anybody such as putting bamboo shoots under ones fingernails that is done by journalists to see what its like or that is done as part of our navy seals training. Theres got to be something a bit different about waterboarding which might put it in the same category as for some purposes that you put i think sleep deprivation into which was in some difficult circumstances of the potential payoff of saving lives you could limit someones ability to sleep if they break were a terrorist suspect, prisoner, whatever. Do you think of it in the same way or no . Guest but may get into that in some of the specifics. I treat this not up because i went to self justify it but to try to create a historical record i think that is the best of my ability in the book and or write, i do make the distinction that there are some things everyone agrees are always wrong and you cant do under any circumstance and then you have some things over here no one has any gasp about then you have this body of steps in the middle that to be perfectly candid, its on the the edge. Whether it is ethical, moral, appropriate coming to need to understand the totality of circumstances in which you find yourselves and even once youve digested the circumstances they could really differ so i didnt use waterboarding. I was part of the administration when we took waterboarding off the table thats but thats because i have different circumstances. I removed it but that was no judgment of what had gone on before and let me finish with this when people ask what would you have done my answer is and i repeat this by answer is thank god i never had to make that decision and for those that are quick to concise, they may want tocome it to backup someone stepped up and made a tough call. Host does with some of the aspects are about. This could be asked about colleague Shaikh Mohammed because there was a dispute and still ongoing i suppose about whether or not being the only person who was water boarded a substantial number of times, whether or not its it produced information from him that did in fact help lead us to osama bin laden. Guest it would be nice to have this golden thread. [inaudible] [laughter] hundreds or thousands are ine fabric that get you where you want to be. So, a couple of data points. It was sleep deprivation. We did use waterboarding but at the end of the day it was one or the other technique. Now having said that, there was a difference in before and after the enhanced interrogation technique. This was totally defy and andy didnt turn into a boy scout or democratic petri but he was more cooperative over here and in fact he gave large volumes of information including information that helped us. Now can i do this and that, it doesnt work that way but let me give you a way that i explain it again in the buck and from the bottom of my heart. I cannot imagine any operation like would have been taking place that did not rely on that Shoppers Warehouse of information we got from those 100 plus detainees. It was like he encyclopedia al qaeda is. Host and now with the ease of once you find them which you point out is very hard to find them to be able to tell fill them with hellfire from a drone among the border, that is a something that is still doable technologically for us now in ways that it hasnt really ever been before and as a result, we have killed a lot of people that if we captured them we might get a good deal of information from them that we cant get information from them if we can sometimes use enhanced interrogation methods or at least something that isnt over the border but on the tough side of the spectrum that you described. Ive characterized this in the past as treating trigger rests like a trout and certain strains. You catch and hold for a while, cant get any information they release them. It seems an odd use of time. We havent done quite the catch and release but we have made it so difficult and politically dangerous to capture and hold someone that they seem like we just default to the option. If we had our successor john in here he would deny. No, no, we are still in the capturing business if we have a chance and so on. And hes probably speaking his heart. But if you just look at the numbers, since january of 2009 i probably have more fingers appeared and more people weve captured and held for american interrogation. Host do you think that is because of the criminal law and criminal justice of what we are supposed to do with respect to terrorists or ignoring the fact we are at war with the terrorist movements . Guest thats one of the things i try to emphasize because in the public debate is paid for this option if you are not treating them as he you would in the criminal Justice System than you were acting in a lawless way. We have multiple legal structures under which we cannot read. Youve got the criminal Justice System but also the wall of the Armed Conflict and you have to president saying we are at war with these people and therefore if that gives us more potency, we can operate in any particular operation under the law of Armed Conflict not of criminal justice. Host one more, weapons of mass distraction, im particularly curious about why we got into the habit of talking about weapons of mass distraction instead of talking about each weapon independently because one produces biological weapons in a very different way. You could have huge volumes that are in the backseat of a volkswagen, chemical weapons are manufactured differently than the Nuclear Weapon and people get confused talking about wmd, but the government has never tried to make it clear why. Guest one of the things i try to address is despite your information and find find we just leave this alone we are the secret Security Service here looking out for your welfare first didnt really work and it really doesnt work in Todays Society where there is a high demand for transparency. So if they continue to do what we did than the cost of doing business is more transparent. That is intending to the changing political culture. There is no benefit to that because you are telling the American People precisely why youre concerned about it and youre exactly right. Let me parse out how we looked at wmd with regards to terrorism. We always said nuclear dispersal of a Nuclear Detonation command ive just given them to you in the order of probability. So wmd, okay well you know as well as i do we parse to doubt much more tightly inside the business. The American People are pretty smart. They could get that explanation. Host the first time that i had seen it it was very important if one was enriching uranium up to a level of 20 , which is what you need for some medical uses, youve done about 90 of the work thats necessary its not a straight curve and i think that there is a lot of misunderstanding about that, people being relatively relaxed about iran having lets say some 20 enriched at one time or another about this going back over the years. But thats another subject that has never really been clearly explained effectively to the public and the journalists or if it has, people dont pick it up. Guest i try to bare my soul about the question. I am uncomfortable with the plan of action in the nuclear deal but i have a chapter on the lines of i dont think that we would block this deal. Its not like the had a better idea either so this has been a problem. Host do better idea would be to keep the sanctions on. [laughter] guest im trying to suggest that this is very difficult for us to deal with. And this progress and thing one reason im uncomfortable in the i am uncomfortable in the deal is that if it works, if it does everything we wanted to do and no one cheats, of course the cheat, thats what they do that will but will be cheated in the way that matters, maybe not. If they wait ten years, there will be an industrialstrength Nuclear Power were never more never more then a few weeks away from enough fissile material. Host let me ask a set of questions people always ask me and i imagine they ask you, which are your favorite spy novels, spy movies, whether or not any of them have anything to do with reality and if there is something that has to do with reality and i will offer an example that is in the espionage world its often hard to find that there but there was a film several years ago called the lives of others about germany in the 1980s. As far as im concerned it is as good as movies get thats distinct from battle scenes and so forth. Guest one of the reasons i wrote was to pull the veil back and let people see into the nature of their own Security Services. I mentioned something about being around the world talking to officers. Ever met jack bauer . [laughter] so, although theres truth in fiction as you know, i wanted to show a little bit of reality. Taking that and moving into the realm of fiction, number one, the best written piece i think is David Ignatius first article age of innocence. It was actually reviewed on the website which was unusual and i still remember one of the lines. The innocence of the novel but its not fiction. It was based on names. Host and no relationship to the other code that was side was the furthest thing possible. But he was a remarkable officer and a station chief and david i think them slightly and when he was killed when the embassy was blown up, this isnt exactly a biography but its close and i completely agree it really has given you a feel for what its like to be an officer. Guest i teach at george mason and i cant talk much about covert action. I signed up about the book. Thats the pros. In a more visual medium i will bring up two of them, one is homeland and it is my short summary of homeland. Everything before that is wrong. Theres a salesperson at langley but thats never going to happen. But the background is right. Opposition to the focus, mission, it rings true. Then let me pull out zero dark 30. There are many things that are artistically correct that are not factually correct and i actually touch upon this in the book. They say for example that there is a Straight Line in the movie between enhanced interrogation and getting to the movie like this in real life they were connected to but it wasnt like this. For 20 minutes of the movie an alleged cia interrogation infinitely over the top. That said, we were not nice to a couple dozen people. So artistically correct but not factually accurate. Then you have the heroine. It was a team effort, not an individual effort but again, artistically correct versus factually correct i will tell you the team that got bin laden was a band of sisters comprised of women chasing bin laden before it was cool. Host on the interrogation in