Earlier quoted context omitted.
at least 39 detainees I don't see anything showing there were others outside the 39 Rather than give my honest opinion here, which would no doubt end up in a kindly word by dang, may I just ask you to run a basic boolean check over your posts before hitting 'reply'. edit - the part you have such difficulty locating is from the exact same section you quoted, just a little further on, page 104.
Your snark aside, "at least 39" doesn't indicate there are more than 39. Also, the bit you quoted from page 104 is in reference to a list of the 17 tortured without authorization. So it also doesn't indicate there were more than 39 total
How can it be referring to the 17 where no authorization was sought, when it specifically states it is talking about authorized interrogations?
And in common meaning, if you say 'at least 39', you are giving a low-end estimate, not a known total.