tv Tonight From Washington CSPAN February 2, 2010 8:00pm-11:00pm EST
foreign actors. and appointed a cyber task force of three members, senators white house, mikulski and snow to conduct a six-month analysis of our government's current land. the task list will be reporting to the full committee shortly. it is my belief and i think the beliefs of others that certain nations represent serious cyber attack potential to our country and i believe them robust diplomatic efforts should be made with the goal of the fact team international agreements among tiac errs regarding cyber security. the time has come to look at the value of a cyber treaty with built-in mutualist aaron says of behavior. it is noteworthy and commendable that the state department has for the first time demarche to another country for its cyber
dignity. it is also worth noting that this country has stated its willingness to cooperate internationally on these matters. there are far more developments around the world that threatened the national security interest of the united states. the past year saw television surge in afghanistan that led to the president's decision to shift strategy and increase troop levels. pakistan continues to be an uneven part or in our counterterrorism and counterinsurgency efforts. somalia and yemen are failed and failing states that require enormous attention. these and many other threats are outlined in the dni's testimony. so now let me turn to the vice chairman with whom i've had the pleasure of working this year and i thank him very much for his cooperation on all matters. mr. vice chairman? >> madam chair, let me welcome
our witnesses and thank you you are the generous to you and your staff have worked with the minority. we believe that this is the way we can achieve what we're supposed to achieve bipartisan, nonpartisan oversight of the critically important intelligence community. this hearing today comes at a time where the importance of the national security threats are currently highlighted by recent events. from that terror plots disrupted this fall via the fbi to the deadly attacks at four dead and little quirk wolverton station to the failed attack on christmas day. we have seen an alarming of terroristic threats. in particular, within and against the homeland being carried out. members and witnesses are where this will be our last annual worldwide ride here in, as i
intend to depart from the senate upon the completion of the 111th congress. no applause, please. ironically, i believe we find ourselves day in the same place we were in when i first joined the committee years ago. analyzing deficiencies within the community to make recommendations for changes that will help us better prevent plots and connect the dots. so as we embark on her final year together, i offer these thoughts for the path forward over the next year and into the future. first, our priorities congressional oversight members committee, under constant challenge of leaders of the icy is to focus on threats to the homeland and our interests overseas. al qaeda and its affiliates and other terrorist organizations today have a global reach. pakistan, afghanistan, nigeria, yemen, the point of africa and elsewhere. they train and prepare for
attacks against us and our allies. our focus must be on these entities wherever they operate. this is a global conflict and yes it is a war. a war of terror, these radicals have declared on america and the west. the intelligence community must lean forward in this war and we on congressional oversight committees must back you up. when we ask you behind closed doors to be aggressive and we do that quite freely, it is our responsibility to stand behind you when the doors are opening to support your actions when they're under the spotlight. and i pledge we will continue to do so. at the same time, our committees will hold the icy accountable and the icy must hold itself accountable because the threats we're dealing with are far too dangerous to tolerate any kind of sloppy work and careless mistakes. as the saying goes, the terrorists only have to get it
right once to be successful. you and we have to get it right all the time. we must use all avenues available for obtaining the crucial information we need to protect our people and that includes a full and humane interrogation of captured suspects prior to or without miranda rights. and i emphasize enemy combatants must be questioned to the fullest by the intelligence community before, if they are brandeis, before they are mirandized and given an attorney. treating terrorists like common criminals can cost as life-saving intelligence. while i have no doubt that the fbi detained useful information from the christmas bomber, we just don't know how many timely leads have been lost as a result of his refusal to cooperate after he was mirandized. this approach gave his terrorist
called extend to cover their tracks while americans remained at risk. and the fbi interrogator or other interrogator will tell you that 50 minutes is not long enough to build a report and get all needed intelligence. any interrogator will tell you that you study up on your subject and read everything in the file first before you are ready to go in for a full and productive interrogation. that takes time and that time must be devoted to the preparation prior to effective questioning. we must plan ahead for how we can bring intelligence to bear in interrogation whether at home or abroad. timely action demands timely intelligence and we must ensure that all intelligence tools are used when we find ourselves in a similar circumstance again. i am frankly appalled, i am appalled that one year after the president ended the previous administration's interrogation program that there was nothing
in place, nothing in place to handle disorder situation presented by the christmas day bombing. i submit to our witnesses today that we cannot afford to make that same mistake again. i presume that the higher value of interrogation group that is still coming on line will solve a number of these problems and rest assured that this committee will be following this closely to ensure that it does. similarly, we cannot but campaign promises lively guide us in decision no matter what the consequences to our society. the ideal of closing guantánamo bay detention facility cannot become more important than protecting our american citizen in a terrorist imprisoned there. and we cannot put americans at risk by letting detainee after detainee we joined the fight. that was a mistake made in a prior administration. that mistake must not continue to be repeated today.
the top two al qaeda operatives in yemen today just as one example are both give no graduates that i've returned to the fight, despite the fact they were supposedly in a rehab program. we also must not let our desire to showcase american justice outweigh the requirement to protect our citizens. terrorist trials in new york or anywhere else are clearly not the most expedient way to try to 9/11 suspects. it has taken a while for some to make it to this reality, but i believe mayor bloomberg's evolution on this topic in his comments from this past week are telling. some in the administration have said they want to try them out in a rural area. i am from a rural area in speaking for a rural state i can tell you that we want nothing to do with those trials and our state. aside from the security concerns and cost, domestic terror trials have exposed sensitive classified information in the past and have given intelligence
to al qaeda, the examples are well known. i need not recount than they are. former judge, former attorney general mika casey has spoken eloquently about that. there are some who try to contradict him but they've proven no contradiction. it is an unacceptable risk, essentially since this congress has passed and the court has upheld the military commission process, which ensures that even a foreign terrorist/enemy combatants can get a fair trial. now turning to afghanistan, we must win there. we cannot afford to fail. the donation of 30,000 troops to implement general mcchrystal's counterinsurgency strategy was a positive step. employing firepower as a whole government approach is the best way to eliminate al qaeda and the taliban insurgency in pakistan. but, the intelligence community must rally around general mcchrystal's coin strategy and continued to shift from a ct
only focus to both a ct or counterterrorist and a counter insurgency approach. there are other threats that are serious and terrorism in the wars in afghanistan and iraq are by no means the only threats facing our community. for more than a decade, the intelligence community has debated iran's nuclear intent and all the while iran has progressed closer and closer to a nuclear weapons capability. today iran seems to be capable of producing highly enriched uranium and that, gentlemen, is the long pole in the tap of a nuclear weapons program and we are left waiting for a nation that provides support training weapons in iraq and afghanistan, along with our allies like hezbollah, hamas, palestinian islamic jihad into the bargaining table.
while iran's intensity change over time and i am hopeful that the people of iran will be successful in pressuring their governments for change, i for one do not believe it is any nations interest. the united states or other nations in the world for iran to possess a nuclear weapons capability. i trust that our witnesses will address the threat from iran and other nationstates today. turning now to how we spend the money and the icy to combat the threats we face, i believe we must be good stewards of taxpayer resources unless we start moving in the right direction with their big dollar overhead or justice will continue to waste billions of dollars on one trick ponies. some of which never, ever come to fruition. those of you in the community know the examples at large and ultimately unsustainable programs that have followed this path. now, the nro or told them i didn't share in the last week
that he agreed with our committee's approach to achieve a more versatile acquisition that this committee has recommended for years and that he was moving forward to execute the program. that means we were very surprised yesterday in the presidents budget that this option is not even funded. i believe that's mistake here to committee will be closely following and hope we'll be able to correct that the legislative process. finally, direct your blair, i was encouraged as was the chair to see that in your written opening statement in the first two and half pages discussing cyber threats, recent cyber attacks under google -underscore the sound cyber policies and initiatives and we know that the intelligence community recognizes this threat and of highest importance and goes well beyond what we are discussing publicly. yet to my chagrin the administration solution has been
a solution i am afraid as a figurehead a cyber czar when it less of a half-dozen staff in a few years i believe we could lament the fact that more was not done to confront the challenge when we had the chance. as senator feinstein and the chair said, senator's white house and senator mikulski embraced a white committee should have much to say on this cyber copy. i believe on the committee agreed that it's very real, very serious and the administration needs to treat it as such. in conclusion, the greatest danger comes from the unknown. the threat not yet on the radar. or the threats are unlikely to be repeat performances, so we must create new methods and tradecraft to recognize terror threats we haven't seen before.
unfortunately, the process of intelligence community reform legislatively is not complete. congress gave the dmi a load of responsibility without the requisite authority. the squabble between the dmi and the cia are, which unfortunately service earlier this year who will serve as a dmi representative over this past year is just another disappointing example to me that we don't have the right balance and the clear rules of the road for the ic. we must get the balance right if you expect it, mr. director to meet the challenges ahead. congress still has work to do with reforming itself in this regard. i pushed a proposal for seven years, one of 14 members of this committee signed onto a few years ago that would provide better coordination between the authorization and appropriations process for intelligence in the senate by creating intelligence subcommittee on the appropriations committee the nine 9/11 commission and others have said we need to bring the authorization approach creations
together. unfortunately, there's some who still strongly oppose making the necessary changes within the congress to serve our intelligence community better. i hope to see progress on not. i'm not holding my breath, but it still needs to be done. additionally, i would mention that the project on national security for them led by jim mock mayor has made excellent and pricing recommendations regarding wind aided national security reform in the u.s. government. leaders in the current administration like national security adviser jim jones, deputy secretary of state, james steinberg him ambassador to the united nations, susan rice, among others all sat on the guiding coronation of the project before assuming positions in his administration. and yet, the administration subsequently moved to strip off funding for the project and has not shown any interest yet in making the necessary changes
that the project greatly recommend. i hope they're listening today because we need some leadership to make sure that we are better equipped to facing challenges of tomorrow. as we remember the sacrifices made by the men and women fighting the threats on the front lines every day, including those who so tragically paid the ultimate price recently. our primary concern must be to watch attacks in the united states and its are the safety of the american people as well as our friends and interests abroad at today's hearing will give us a good idea how we can measure up and i thank you madam chair. i look forward to hearing the testimony of eyewitnesses. >> thank you am i very much, mr. vice chairman. here's how we'll proceed, gentlemen. director blair if you'd represent the entire intelligence community, we will then go to mr. panetta, mr. mueller, mr. burgess and
mr. dinger for five minutes each amend each one of us will proceed with questions. so direct your blair, we'd be delighted to hear from you. >> writes, thank you, chairwoman. in providing you with this intelligence community annual threat assessment and proud to represent the thousands of patriotic highly skilled trade professionals at the world's finest intelligence team. i'm especially can't just buy this as we mourned the recent loss of seven of our officers and care for a dozen others who have been wounded in recent months. all intelligence agencies participated in preparing my statement for the record and i'm pleased to be accompanied and my colleagues here this afternoon. every day as we know information technology brings gadgets and services that make our lives better and more efficient. however, malicious cyber activity is growing at an
unprecedented rate, as human extraordinary skill and sophistication. in the dynamic of cyberspace, technology balance right now favors malicious acts instead of illegal actors and is likely to continue that way for quite some time. in addition, the growing role in international companies supplying software and hardware for private networks, even for sensitive u.s. government networks increases the potential for subversion and mischief. the recent intrusions reported by google, yet another wake-up call to those who have not taken this problem seriously. cyber crime is on the rise, global cyber bank has serious implications for economic and financial occasions. attacks against networks of transportation and financial networks, energy could create havoc. cyber defenders miss the facts of the member are the cyber
defenders have to spend more, have to work harder than cyber attackers and american efforts are not stronger in this regard right now. the united states government and the private sectors who are interlinked inextricably in the space have to ensure that they are in place. the global economy where the terms of our positive was the year ago that i sat here and warned of the dangers of a global depression. but an unprecedented policy response by governments and central banks around the world that a foundation for global recovery that must forecasters expect will continue through 2010, although high employment and pocket the difficulty will still persist. not all countries have emerged from the font that several of them are important to the united states. pakistan, the ukraine are still struggling to put their economic houses in order. our allies are trying to inflate spending on afghanistan while many of them are helping with
this with budget cuts. china is emerging with enhanced clout, its economy will go from being a third of the size of that of the u.s. to roughly half by 2015, an earlier date than we had previously projected. this is assuming it maintains the rapid growth should appear to read the ingredients to do. last year, beijing's intermediate two g20 stretch to increase imf resources they deployed naval forces to international antipiracy operations in the gulf of aden. it supported a medium security tonsil resolution against what korea. however, beijing's belief that the united states seeks to contain it, seeks to transform it and it reinforces chinese concerns internal stability and about received challenges to their sovereignty claims. china continues to increase its defense spending preparation for a taiwan conflict with the u.s. intervention continues to dominate their contingency plans in turn also increasingly
worries about how to protect its global interests. turning to violent extremism, as you mentioned, madam chair, we've been warning the past several years about al qaeda itself, al qaeda's associated groups and al qaeda inspired terrorist strike in the united states and we see in the reality all three of those characteristics of al qaeda and the examples that you cited in your opening statement. umar farouk abdulmutallab and major nidal malik hasan. the violent extremist threat al qaeda at sumner is evolving. we have to meet the complex multiple team attacks very difficult for al qaeda to pull off. as we saw with the recent successful and attempted terrorist attacks, however, identifying individual terrace, small groups of short histories using simple attack method is a new degree of difficulty. we did not identify
mr. abdulmutallab before he boarded northwest flight to 53 christmas day but we should have. we are working to improve so we can. only decreasing minority of muslims support violent extremism according to numerous polls within the muslim community. it even with increasing in smaller amounts, al qaeda's radical ideology still seems to appeal strongly to some disaffected young muslim people of suicide bombers and other fighters in the form fortunately includes americans. but we don't have a high threat that faces european countries i do we have to worry about the peel the figures like anwar al-awlaki and exert on young american muslims. however much we improve our intelligence and we intend to improve it even more than it is however we cannot count on it to attach every threat presented by counterterrorism after attending afghan pakistan theatre as well
as around the world in places like yemen, somalia and elsewhere will be critical to further diminishing threat. we have to continue to work with allies and partners in this campaign, enhance law enforcement, security measures, immigration and visa controls, aviation and border security. while these are important for multilayered dynamic defense that can disrupt terrorist plans. let me turn to the outlook in afghanistan and pakistan. since junior 2007, the taliban has increase its influence and expanded the insurgency while holding onto it -- done -- smack director, can you pull that microphone closer. you fade out when you turn your head. thank you. >> as a sense, for about two years the taliban has increased its influence and expanded the insurgency. the challenges that we face are clear. number one, reversing the taliban momentum while we reinforce security elsewhere.
second, improving afghan security forces, government and economic capabilities of the security gains will endure and the responsibility can be transferred to the afghan youth in afghanistan themselves. early successes in places like hell meant for marines have been deployed for several month for economic programs are in place and where local government is competent show that we can make solid progress even when the threat is high. the safe haven in afghanistan insurgents have in pakistan is the groups most important outside support. disrupting a safe haven won't be sufficient by 12 to defeat the insurgency, but disrupting insurgent in afghanistan is a necessary condition for making substantial progress. the increase in terrorist attacks in that country has made the pakistani public more concerned about the threat from islamic extremists, including al
qaeda. pakistan is continue to support military action against insurgents. islamabad has demonstrated determination and persistence in combating militants that it perceives are dangerous to pakistan's interests. but it also has continued to provide some support to other pakistan-based groups that operate in afghanistan. u.s. and coalition success against the insurgency in afghanistan could provide new long-term incentives for afghans for pakistan to take steps against afghan focused militants. increase pakistani cooperation is more likely if pakistan is persuaded the united states is committed and stabilizing afghanistan and will ultimately have success. finally, turning to iran, the available intelligence continues to indicate that tehran is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons. this is being done in part by developing various nuclear capabilities that bring you closer to the ability to produce
weapons. one of the key capabilities iran continues to develop as its uranium enrichment program, published information from the international atomic energy agency, the iaea indicates that iran has significantly expanded the number of centrifuges involved in it facility. but it has had problems operating at centrifuges with constrain its production of low enriched uranium. the united states and other countries announced last september that iran for years has been building in secret a second enrichment facility near calm. overall, we continued to success that iran has a scientific, technical and industrial capacity to produce and of highly enriched uranium for weapons in the next few years if it chooses to do so. and ultimately, to produce nuclear weapons. the central issue is a political decision to do so. iran also continues to improve
its illicit missile force which enhances his power production and provides tehran the means of delivering possible nuclear payload. we do not know if iran will eventually decide to make nuclear weapons and we continue to judge that iran takes a cost-benefit approach and its nuclear decision-making. we judge that this offers the international community opportunities to influence iran's decision-making. the uranium regime has found itself in a weaker internal position, internal political situation following last chance disputed residential election on the crackdown on protesters. reacting to stronger-than-expected opposition and the regimes narrowing base of support comes up ringleader, president ozment in a shot has appeared determined to retain the upper hand by force. they are moving iran in a more authoritarian direction to consolidate their power. however, they have not been
successful so far in suppressing the opposition. not an chairwoman, this is the top layer of threats and opportunities, barriers to amend our attention and focus that include security in iraq on the korean peninsula, weapons of mass distraction percolation and challenges right here in the western hemisphere, especially working with mexico and its efforts against the drug cartels. i am also prepared as my colleagues to discuss transnational issues like global help. really it's the very complexity of issues and multiplicity of actors, stage, not state that increase our challenges. the intelligence community is meeting these challenges every day, both to policymakers and two units in the field both civil and military. in the year on the job i've been enormously impressed by the abilities on the dedication and the results of the 100,000 military and civilian intelligence professionals i have the honor to lead. thank you, madam chairwoman.
really glad to answer questions after my colleagues have a chance to make statements. >> thank you ramus, director blair. mr. panetta? >> thank you, madam chairman. mr. vice chairman and members of the committee. thank you for this opportunity to be able to share our thoughts with regards to the threats, both current and future buffets this country. i think the director has presented a summary of some of the key threat that we confront. of those, i would share with you that my greatest concern and what keeps me awake at night is that al qaeda and its terrorist allies and affiliate could very well attack the united states in our homeland. that's primary reason president provided the mission that we follow, which is the mission to
disrupt, dismantle and defeat al qaeda and its allies. having said that, the biggest threat i see is not so much that we face another attack similar to 9/11. i think the greater threat is that al qaeda is adapting their method in ways that often times make it difficult to detect. we have done a very effect their job at disrupting their operations and the five to hear it and i think intelligence confirms that they are finding it difficult to be able to engage in the planning and the command and control operations to put together a large attack. what's happening inside is that they are moving to other safe
havens and two other regional knowns in places like yemen and somalia, the monograph and others. and what's happening is that they are pursuing an average to try to strike at the united states in three ways. one is that they deploy -- they have deployed individuals to this country. we've had a series of arrests, i think about the arrest, the hadley arrest are indicative of those that have been deployed here and continue to stay in touch with al qaeda. secondly, it's the concern about the terrorist who has cleaned -- quote, cleaned credentials, and quote. that doesn't have a history of terrorism that has come to our
attention. abdulmutallab obviously was someone that was out there. he added the site and as a result they decided to make use of somebody like that within a very short period of time that he arrived. i think they're going to be looking for other opportunities like that. and thirdly, there is the loner, the individual like hasan who added self radicalization decides that the moment has come to engage in an attack by himself. so is the loan will strategy that i think we have to attention to as a threat to this country. we are being aggressive in going
after this threat. we've expanded our human intelligence. we are engaging with our liaison partners in other countries to try to track these kinds of threats. we are obviously checking and reviewing watch lists and other list to determine who among them would be that potential lone wolf. and we are taking the fight to the enemy and we will continue to do that. but in addition to the fight against al qaeda, we are also facing threats from other terrorist groups. terrorist like al shabazz, hezbollah, hamas, other jihadist militant groups. and of particular concern is elliot t., last car in the i.t. about which if they should conduct an attack against india could very well undermine our efforts in pakistan.
in addition, we've mentioned directors mentioning the threat north korea and iran and while obviously we're concerned about the nuclear side, they also continue to export terrorism, providing weapons, providing support to a whole series of other terrorist groups. so, bottom line here is that the war on terrorism is not just al qaeda. it is a series of terrorist groups that are basically confronting us. and it is the kind of changes that we see and their method of approaching the united states but i think represent a very important threat that we have to pay attention to. we are being aggressive and taking the fight to the enemy. and at the same time, we have to be agile. we have to be diligent and we have to be created in the way we approach these new threat.
fundamental mission we have is obviously to protect this country. it's the mission that people at host gave their lives for and at the mission that the cia will follow because we believe our greatest mission is to keep this country safe here at >> thank you very much, mr. panetta. mr. mueller? >> thank you very much and good afternoon chairman feinstein five-member bond and members of the committee. i'm director blair pointed to the global nature of many of the threats we face from international terrorism in pakistan, yemen and elsewhere to cyberattacks to computer crime committed by international criminal enterprises. in what is striking is how many of these overseas threats reached directly into the united states. today, then south of the united states often have immediate impact on our security here at
home. as i discuss our mission and the overall threat assessment, i do want to highlight how quickly these threats are evolving and how globalization has often led to the integration of these foreign and domestic threats. over the past decade, the focus of strategic terrorism threats has been south asia, the heartland of al qaeda. but now as direct her panetta pointed out, al qaeda trainers seek the areas in pakistan is less secure and this has led al qaeda to franchise into regional components in places such as north africa and the arabian peninsula. this evolution has been most rapid with al qaeda in the arabian peninsula, which has changed from a regional group with links to al qaeda to a global threat with reach into american cities such as detroit. these changes affect the way we at the fbi think about the targets we pursue and what tools
we need to pursue them. they also require us to keep changing continuously to meet the evolving threat of tomorrow. the expansion of violent ideology has proven to be persistent and globalist demonstrated by the path we have seen in the past year and those blacklisted by the chairman in her opening statement. those cases demonstrate the global diversity of the new terrorism for. some extremists are radicalized over the internet or in prison. others receive training from known terrorist organizations abroad. they were of different ages and nationalities, and number were us-born. target of these attacks range from civilian to government facilities to transportation infrastructure to our military, both in the united states and overseas. the threats from cyberattacks has been pointed out by direct
your blair gives the globalization and change. in the past we've focused primarily on state act or is seeking national security information from our military or intelligence services were seeking to acquire technology related to defense systems. but as the global economy integrates, and many cyberthreats now focus on economic war, nongovernment targets, as we've seen with the recent cyberattacks on google. targets in the private sector are at least as vulnerable as traditional targets and the damage can be just as great. our focus on the cyberthreat does that mean that we have seen a decline in classic intelligence and counterintelligence activities in the united states. the presence of foreign intelligence officers in the united states is not declining and they are increasingly using nontraditional collection methods to gather information. these services continue to pose
a significant threat in our counterintelligence mission remains a high priority for the fbi. chairman feinstein and chairman bond of the ranking you for your support of the beer on behalf of the men and women of the fbi we look forward to continuing to work with you to improve the fbi and to keep america safe and thank you i'd be happy to answer any questions you might have. >> thank you i'm a mr. mueller. general burgess? >> not an chairwoman, thank you for this opportunity to be here today. for the assessment of current and projected threats to the security of the united states. the global strategic environment today remains marked by a broader grid to similar threats and challenges good as the united states continues to conduct combat information theaters, the nation also faces the threat of terrorist attacks at home. simultaneously, we continue to face with host by other nations growing abilities to challenge our quantitative military
superiority in other regions. it is a time that significantly challenges the international system in the department of defense. therefore, our armed forces and the iaea must remain confident of global forces and content. as a 2010 judy are states, the united states faces a complex and uncertain security landscape in which the pace of change continues to accelerate. al qaeda remains the most significant terrorist right to the united states to al qaeda's propaganda, attack planning and support of the taliban and accounting networks continues. the group still pursued chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear materials for attacks. al qaeda affiliates continue to extend the terrorist group reached and brand. al qaeda in the arabian peninsula is growing in size and is broadening its repertoire of attacks. once focused mainly inside algeria, al qaeda in the lands of the islamic grabe is
conducting once in other countries. levels in afghanistan increase our share while security declined because of an increasingly capable insurgency. the governments inability to extend security throughout the country and insurgent access to sanctuaries in pakistan. originally concentrated in a polished and dominated south and east the insurgency retains momentum and has spread west and north. afghanistan's security forces are growing but not keeping pace with the taliban's ability to exploit the security factor. pakistan's federally administered tribal area continues to provide the insurgency al qaeda and terrorist groups as valuable sanctuary for training, recruitment, planning and logistics. successful strikes against al qaeda and other militant leaders in a fata has stopped them. it has demonstrated increased
counterinsurgency training at doctrinal adjustments, but it's priority remains in the end. we have confidence in pakistan's ability to safeguard its weapons, though for mobility exists. notwithstanding recent high-profile bombings claimed by al qaeda in iraq come in the country is still on a general secure path. the group remains the most capable sunni terrorist groups constrained by lack of safe havens. it has regained some freedom of movement following u.s. forces withdraw from iraqi state. iraq's security forces conduct the majority of security operations independently, but still require improvements in logistics, technical committee kay should an intelligence surveillance and reconnaissance. in iraq, iran continues to rely heavily upon me revolutionary art for the course of special operations command to undermine u.s. efforts by providing weapons, money and training to
iraqi shia militants who are attacking u.s. personnel. turning briefly to nations, regions and trends of interest. iran supports terrorist groups and insurgents in iraq, afghanistan, lebanon, gaza and elsewhere as a means to expand its own influence. frustrate regional rivals and impede u.s. strategy across the region. and invest heavily on developing ballistic with better actors in new payloads. with more than a thousand insults and her visions are gone now house enough enriched uranium for nuclear weapon if it further in which dan processed. china's military modernization continues with the acquisition of growing numbers of very sophisticated aircraft, warships, missiles and the personnel required to employ these capabilities. china seeks military security on its periphery with focus on traditional military advantages and air in evil power projection
and in space. north korea remains unlikely to eliminate its nuclear weapon weapons capability for the foreseeable future. believing the weapons serve as a strategic deterrent and leverage while also counterbalancing logistic shortage as, aging equipment and insufficient training debt plagued its conventional forces. russia is proceeding with ambitious military reform, the effects of a global recession and aging industrial base, corruption and mismanagement in demographic trends will limit moscow's ability to realize the full benefits of the reform plan. but the sweeping the organization likely will increase the military advantage over adjacent nations. in latin america, mexico remains locked in a violent struggle against drug trafficking organizations which pose a grave threat to the state. venezuela and arms purchases from russia continue. colombian operations have reduced the marchers armed forces of colombia by nearly 50%
to approximately 8500 personnel. sustained pressure could splinter it them until a poses less of a threat to institutions, though would remain involved in criminal act to ditties. the threat posed by ballistic missiles is likely to increase and grow more complex over the coming decade as they become more mobile, survivable, reliable and accurate at greater ranges. prelaunch survivability also grows as potential adversary strengthen their denial and methods. let me conclude by saying that while dia's top wartime priority is to provide the intelligence required by her military commanders and policy lenders in support of our ongoing combat operations. this agency can currently retains core responsibility to prevent strategic surprise and be positioned to respond to a wide range of contingencies. that requires the most prudent and judicious use of our resources, especially our most important resource, our people
come up of civilians and those in uniform. in visits with tias for deployed military and civilian personnel, including in iraq and afghanistan, i remain impressed by an thankful for their willingness to serve the nation in wartime. many are on their second or third deployment alongside our troops in harms way. some have been wounded by roadside bombs and mortar attacks, notwithstanding their sacrifices they continue to serve knowing the intelligence they provide safe life and speech operations. on their behalf, i want to thank this committee for their strong support in continuing conflicts in the intelligence agency and our mission. >> thank you very much, general burgess. ambassadors dinger, if you would be the wrapup speaker, please. connecting a mac, madam chairman. members of the committee is my pleasure to be here today to represent the bureau of intelligence research and state department. although one of the false intelligence community elements, we consider ourselves to be
mighty contributors to the secretary of state as shiva felt a responsibility as the presence chief foreign policy adviser. and were proud of our contribution to the intelligence committee of the united states. >> can you pull that make a little closer. thank you. >> apparently you have to speak directly into the head of the microphone. >> i'll do that. >> thank you. >> our principal mission is to provide timely and accurate intelligence analysis that enables u.s. diplomacy to participate and address opportunities and do so early nasa policymakers can take actions. the average analyst and i and the 11 years of experience, allowing him to offer what we believe is an uncommon depth of understanding of the characters and issues that plague in the world. we are proud to put it start that this intelligence community. there are intelligence policy and court nations staff, inr
also ensures that intelligence activities are consistent with advanced you are an untrained foreign policies. and they understand the information and analytical needs of the foreign policy decision-makers. inr has other important missions, one is to act as the ics political outreach bring in outside expertise to bear on the most challenging of foreign policies of the day. inr opposite opinion research seems to be the u.s. governments foremost authority worldwide public. mr. blair addresses the global challenges before us. i will take just a few moments to highlight two areas that the dni and others have hardly spoken to. and in which the inr is supporting the priorities as secretary clinton in the intelligence community and the united states government. first, counter terrorism. terrorism remains a key focus
for inr analyst. we have a small but dedicated team of analysts and opposite terrorism, narcotics and crime. they were closely with the regional analyst and throughout the i see to produce strategic analysis and nuance contacts. the second area i also want to highlight is cyber. in 2008, the state department established a new office, inr office of cyberaffairs to analyze the cyberissues and help coordinate the department cyberactivities. currently, housed at inr, inr cybercollaborates across the industry department and throughout the ic to strengthen cybersecurity. it is also engaging with their nations to help establish norms that will help maintain the stability and confidence in the internet. inr believes the intelligence community has -- i want to very
briefly mention two. only one of which has been covered in today's oral statements. first, economic implacable progress in africa remains that even, very scrapie from nation to may chin and is still subject to some reversal or gradual erosion. the daunting of rate of challenges facing african nations makes it highly likely in the coming year that a number of african countries will face new outbreaks of political instability and economic distress. they will join ongoing and seemingly intractable conflicts in places such as sudan and somalia. nigeria, for example, faces serious social economic and security challenges over the next year. jini provides an example of how quickly african crises in approach. many african nations also with humanitarian crises. in some latin american countries, democracy and policies remain at risk because
crime, corruption and government, powerful drug cartels and violent crime undermine basic security elsewhere. elected populist leaders and some countries are moving toward a more authoritarian political and economic model and impose u.s. policies in the region. madam chairman, members of the committee, inr will continue to think, analyze and write strategically to identify for secretary clinton the threats, challenges and opportunities of rising from a complex and dynamic global environment. we work hand in glove with the rest of the intelligence community to ensure the security of the united states. inr will strive to put intelligence at the service of foreign policy and make certain that intelligence activities advance america toward our foreign policy goals and protect us from threats. thank you once again for the opportunity to approve before you. i will answer any questions you have pierced my thank you earn
much, mr. ambassador. to begin the question, i would like to ask a very specific question of each one of you if you advantage. the question is, what is the likelihood of another terrorist attempted attack on the u.s. homeland in the next three to six months, high or low, direct your blair? >> and attempted attack to priority a certain i would say. >> mr. panetta? >> i would agree with that. >> mr. mueller? >> agree. >> mr. dinger? all right. i think that tells us something very clearly. there has been a response to the abdulmutallab case that all suspected terrorists should be labeled enemy combatants and prosecuted to the military
commission system if at all. candidly, my view is that the president should have the flexibility to make a determination based on the individual circumstances of the case, the location of the terrorist activity, the location of the arrests come in the nationality the suspect, whether federal kinds of conflict have been violated, et cetera. i would like to ask this question, mr. mueller. what is the fbi's track record in gaining intelligence and collecting evidence to convict terrorists since 9/11? >> madam chairman, in your opening statements you mention many of the cases that we address last year, a number of disruptions from dallas to springfield, illinois, charlotte, north carolina, decide the case of denver and new york and almost all of these cases, the intelligence we have gathered intelligence, some of
that intelligence has become evident so that we could arrest, indict and continue to prosecute those individuals. since september 11th, we've had numerous disruptions, just about everyone of these cases where there are two or more involved, one or more of the individuals have ultimately cooperated, given the leverage of the criminal justice system to cooperate not just against the conspirators but also to provide intelligence as to whether potential threats. antique center we have had success since september 11th, it has been because we have been able to convince persons to provide intelligence, to provide evidence on others who may be involved in the plot and persuade individuals both here and the united states as elsewhere in the world to contribute to intelligence as well as evidence to disrupt plots and to assure that those who are engaged in the plots are successfully prosecuted and
incarcerated. >> thank you very much. i'd like to just quickly ask one question on the status of hezbollah, which has not been mentioned. director, u.s. says that hezbollah is the largest recipient of iranian financial aid, training and weaponry and iran's senior leadership has cited hezbollah as a model for other militant groups. how has hezbollah rebuild its military arsenal since its 2006 war with israel? >> let me get some help from the general, too. hezbollah is stronger now than in 2006 when the last word to waste and also developed politically. >> madam chairman, the director i would agree with his assessment. they in fact were reinforced and replaced very quickly what they
have lost in the 2006 war with israel. and today i think they are actually stronger and have improved themselves. >> can you comment on the sophistication of these replacements? >> in some cases, from a missile standpoint, i think they're indications they have improved, but at a minimum they maintain parity that touts more quantity. >> thank you very much. i think that's going to be a army for now now. mr. vice chairman, why don't you go ahead? >> thank you, madam chair. and director mueller we congratulate you on the excellent work that the fbi has done in capturing and bringing to justice those ozzie and other
people whose capture was announced last fall. i would ask that whether you believe that a questioning of an enemy combatant, someone with potential knowledges battlefield intelligence for the future can be done briefly or within a short timeframe needed to give the customary aranda writes of a normal criminal suspect a bank robber in the united states. do you agree with those in the intelligence community who say the only effective way of interrogating somebody like
abdulmutallab would be to spend the time to collect the information otherwise available in the intelligence community. background and what other intelligence may be available in order to questioning effectively, to be able to ask him questions about issues where we know the answers to see if he's telling the truth and to confront him with other intelligence he. do you believe that is necessary in some cases, that information on an enemy combatant? >> well, senator, let me -- we talked to an early but then also someone specifically about the events of christmas day. the me start off with the belief that we in the fbi, as everybody in this room understand, knows the importance of intelligence. since september 11th, just in
the mission of the fbi to prevent terrorist attacks, not just indict and arrest and convict persons for those terrorist attacks, but to preventing terrorist attacks and intelligence is key. if you look at the circumstances of christmas day, the plane came in at approximately 12:00. shortly thereafter rates, we started pushing on information relating to the events that had occurred on the plane as it went into detroit. we then, as i think everybody in this room knows and understands abdulmutallab was arrested on the plane and taken to the hospital. we have them go to the hospital. they were given an opportunity to talk to abdulmutallab before he went to surgical procedures. byrne himself and trying to light the explosives. ut if there were other bombs on the plane, whether there were bombs in other planes, who was
responsible, and took that opportunity because i was given and there was an immediate need to have that information that intelligence to determine what the threat was at that time. the doctors then took him in for surgical procedures. during that afternoon, there were discussions here amongst most of the agencies here as to what should occur down the road. although no specific instructions or consultations with persons at this table as to whether the individual should be mile an hour andized. we were then given an opportunity later that night to, again, interview him and after consultation or in consultation with justice department attorneys we determined to follow our protocols, protocols established by the supreme court in terms of how you interrogate and question individuals in custody in the united states. he was -- a team went in to talk with him. he talked for a few moments and then afterwards after he was given his miranda warnings, asked for an attorney and we
discontinued the questioning. we felt we had to take that opportunity at the outset to gather the intelligence. it was not ideal. we did not have much information at 3:30 in the afternoon when the plane when the plant and at 1:00. we gathered information through the afternoon to do a better cushion interrogation the evening. we've found over a period of time that the miranda warnings can but often enough are not impediment to obtaining additional intelligence and the story continues. we have been successful, very successful in gathering intelligence over a period of time. we've teams, persons from various agencies most recent example being intelligence we've gotten from david headley arrested in chicago for his participation in the copenhagen plot, but also subsequently indicated his involvement in the mumbai shootings. as i say in this case as in all cases we will continue to
provide and obtain i should say information intelligence from mutalab and that he would wish additional information on that -- been unmasking additional procedural question. you're not seeing an enemy combat and that comes into the united states has been ruled by the supreme court to be entitled to miranda rights before questioning proceeds, are you? >> i'm saying if a person is accepted by the dod for prosecution before a military commission he is not entitled under the procedures that are extent to miranda mornings however that hasn't gone to the supreme court. and so there is a difference between having a person in the federal district court and civilian courts and under military commissions. >> and that is the point.
that's the point. many commentators and i have agreed treating this person has a comment united states criminal when he was clearly in any combatant i don't know how much more clearly can be an enemy, but unlike the german saboteurs who own life in the united states in the early 1940's. nobody thought that they were bank robbers coming in from germany to rob banks. it didn't treat him as such and from the press reports what we have seen this was not your bank robber. he wasn't a car hijacker. this person was an enemy combatant. who ultimately made the decision to mirandize? who was the individual? where did that decision rest in the chain? >> it rested with the head of the counterterrorism division along with attorneys from the department of justice.
>> it was the department of justice decision mirandize -- >> it was a combination of our providing the facts in the department in consultation with justice making the decision he should be mirandized. >> while other agencies to part, we have heard that they felt they needed to have more opportunity to questioning. >> mr. vice chairman, on that score i am for getting as much intelligence from anybody remotely connected with terrorism as somebody was carried a bomb into the country. but i think that we need a -- we need to have the flexibility of the tools we have available to hughes and i am not convinced that you can make -- i'm convinced you cannot be a hard decision that everything should be taken to the military tribunal or everything should be taken through federal court.
there are decisions that have to be made in which to balance the requirement for intelligence with the requirement for a prosecution and the source of pressure you can bring on the people you a rest in either form. it's got to be a decision made at the time and i think the balance struck on the mutallab case was a very understandable balance. we get good intelligence, we get more -- >> i disagree very strongly with that conclusion, but i agree with you that there should be -- there should be a decision made after consultation with the relevant agencies in the intelligence community when an enemy combatants comes before the the part of justice gives the order to mirandize. the enemy combatants es the decision ought to be made by the intelligence with the participation of the intelligence community whether they think future safety of the
united states would make it imperative to question that enemy combatants before getting him a lawyer and mirandizing. >> i just say we consider directors be a part of the committee. he's one of the brothers. >> but he reports to the attorney general, and you, mr. director, should be the head of the intelligence community. that is -- we haven't made it clear we need to make that clear. >> thank you very much, mr. vice chairman. senator rockefeller. >> i don't relish pursuing this, but in that it has become kind of a cause du jour i think it's important to.
agree totally, director blair, what you said that it should be done on a case by case basis, nothing should be ruled in, nothing should be ruled out. there is instinct on the part of some that the only way you can correctly get intelligence and then prosecute the enemy combatants or whatever you want to call them is through a military commission and i think their record is they have condemned three and two of them are gone on the streets. you, through the criminal justice system, director mueller, have prosecuted hundreds there are round or in jail. let me just ask, director mueller, has your experience as the fbi director in the years
since 9/11, and you've been there since each of those days, have terrorist suspects provided valuable intelligence after they had been mirandized? >> on a number of occasions, yes, sir. >> case by case? >> case by case. one was already mentioned, david headley out of chicago which is one of the more recent ones back in 2004 there was an individual by the name of mohammed was a -- another. >> to terrorist suspects always automatically come forth with intelligence unless and until they are mirandized? >> no, it differs from case to case, circumstance by circumstance. >> thank you. is it true depending on the circumstances in some cases the best method for gaining intelligence is by charging the terrorist with a crime, mirandizing him and conducting a
thorough criminal investigation? >> we have found the system of justice in the united states which allows for consideration for contributing intelligence and information and credit for that is a powerful incentive to persons to provide truthful actionable information, evidence and intelligence. we have other countries that don't have the same system of justice where there is no incentive to cooperate or provide intelligence and the person stays in jail without any incentive to provide intelligence and without providing a ultimately any intelligence, so in case after case here we have been successful in turning into some sort of agreement with the defendant and having that defendant provide actionable intelligence. >> i don't want particularly an answer from any of you on this but it is my impression having studied this the military
commissions process for prosecuting is relatively informed in a state of play. it is not an experienced professional process such as you have at your disposal. it may work very well. it may not work very well. i'm not talking about the getting of intelligence but i'm talking about the prosecuting. i don't expect you to answer on that. i am simply giving you my opinion. recognizing the classification issue at stake, can you tell me if -- can't you answer this already but i want this in the record, if the abdulmutallab provided a valuable intelligence that his fbi interrogations'? >> he provided responses to questions, information and to the extent we get into more
detail i would ask we did in closed session. >> i understand that. i understand that. in your professional judgment i would say to director blair, and you sort of answer to this but i would like it again on the record because i think this is a debate which is spilling most on healthfully across the talk shows and beyond. in your professional judgment are the compelling national security reasons to prosecute some terrorism cases and a federal criminal court rather than in the military commission? and on the other side would there be some cases you might prefer to join in a military commission or are you familiar enough with their processes to make such recommendation?
>> senator, it's not my responsibility or do i have a great deal of expertise in the venue that shows for prosecution. but i'm interested in is getting the intelligence out so we can do a better job against the group's debt send these people, and as i have seen intelligence come from a variety of interrogations' primarily based on the skill of the interrogators and there are good ones in many different places and by the degree to which we back them up and back them up quickly with an intelligence team which can help them with their requirements to i think that is the key thing from my point of view. >> i would ask both of you and actually of all five it seems to me what we come down to in this brief interchange is that this should be done on a case by case basis based upon what seems to be best according to professionals who carry the responsibility and the judgment for making those decisions.
should be criminal justice, should it be military commission. would you agree with that? >> i think the decision is bound up in the interrogation which is what i care about so i think yes it should be a rapid flexible case by case balancing, the requirement for intelligence with requirement to put these people behind bars and not let them go free is what we need. >> director mueller? >> i think it is this decision whether or not to proceed in a federal district court or civilian court versus a military commission is a wade decision. we've had two locations it's happened in the past somebody has been taken out of civilian court and put into the military courts and then ended up back in civilian courts. an individual by the name of pedia. so yes, the differences in
procedures for interrogation is one factor but there are a number of other factors that need to be weighed by the justice department and executive before that decision is made. >> and i am not sure it is a decision that can be made for it quickly because there are a number of competing factors and one would want to take some time i think in order to sort those factors out. >> but in the end of this is a decision that should be made by professionals, according to their responsibilities, and according to the facts of the case. >> yes, but ultimately it is the attorney general and the president making decisions -- >> what i'm saying is we should not limit the president by saying it has to go here or it has to go there. >> absolutely. >> he should not be limited. >> thank you. >> thank you, senator rockefeller. senator hatch? >> thank you, madam chairman. first of all i would like to
thank all of you for the hard work that you do for our country and for our people. you are great people in my eyes. director blair, let me start with you and a few minutes ago we received from your office a copy of the letter signed by john brennan assistant for homeland security and counterterrorism to speaker policy on the subject of the closure of guantanamo and the transfer of the teams abroad. the second paragraph of the letter states the following. the professional assessment of our military commanders and civilian leaders of the department of defense is the closing of the detention facilities at guantanamo is a national security imperative in the war against al qaeda. secretary gates and admiral mullen and general petraeus bate in closing guantanamo will help the troops by eliminating potent
recruiting tool. in my mind the word imperative implies something that has to be a dress for an immediate reaction. director blair, i concur terrorist propaganda does use guantanamo as a theme. it also uses close relationship with israel but i don't think we are going to change our policies toward israel as a result and by his assertion or this assertion by mr. brennan let me just ask you these specific questions. is there in the intelligence or analysis you can share or provide an close steering the proves indicates or suggests al qaeda would change its plans and intense if we close guantanamo. >> i don't think it would change his plans or intent but it would deprive al qaeda of a powerful
symbol wind recruiting tool which it has actively exploited over the years. >> because that they would have one less recruiting fema. is there an intelligence analysis that the threat from outside would be diminished? >> the extent which they didn't, were not able to recruit people who the guantanamo symbol helped them to recruit the would be weak without. >> is there any intelligence or analysis that specifically indicates u.s. forces abroad would be on under any less threat were guantanamo to be closed? >> you are a much better lawyer than i am, i've learned these in these exchanges. it is a factor that helps the enemy but if we can deprive them of the factor it's good. >> i'm not trying to give you a rough time work cross-examine but i am trying to establish a thing is when to change their attitude toward office and there
are a lot of things that we do that they don't like, including our friendship with israel and other countries in the middle east, arab countries. let me ask this have you ever provided intelligence to policy makers of the support the notion that the homeland or the troops will be safer after guantanamo is closed? >> we provided intelligence and i assess, senator hatch, among the factors that we can -- among the things we can do that would weaken al qaeda is to close guantanamo and diminish the emotional and symbolic support that gives them in the pool of people they try to recruit in order to come against us. >> is it true al qaeda used to prosecute, the prosecution and imprisonment of the blind sheik as a recruiting tool and al
qaeda members said they were inspired to attack us because of that incarceration? you know that's true. >> is there any intelligence that suggests al qaeda wouldn't use a prison located in the united states as a recruiting tool? i've been to guantanamo. it's pretty nice compared to illinois, the place and illinois where they want to put them. it would be nice and cold in the wintertime and all i can say is i imagine there will be a cry we are not here by bringing them here. >> i'm sure there will be stories about where they are incarcerated but i am thinking of books that have been written by former detainees that are passed out, testimonies on the internet that guantanamo achieved a mythic quality which
helps al qaeda. >> i think the point i'm trying to make and of course i think it is easy to see that no matter what we do they are going to criticize us. >> we've got a very significant courthouse at guantanamo that could try these in the military commission. we treat them very well down there. some of them probably are treated better than they've ever been treated in their lifetime. no matter what you do, the terrorists in al qaeda and taliban and others are going to complain and say that we are not doing it right. it seems to me crazy to take the position that because guantanamo has been a recruiting tool we ought to close it and when it meets every need we basically every need we need in handling
these matters. i have other questions but will submit them in writing. i'm really concerned we've seen what happened the past week with regard to the desire to hold a trial in midtown manhattan, and now there is a great desire not to treat as a trial lawyer i can tell you that there are all kind of approaches that can be taken that would be better than trying khalid sheikh mohammed in this country and in the case for years prior or to go through a whole process that ultimately gets off because one juror didn't believe in the death penalty and during that trial he was taunting families of those
that have been killed and using it as a propaganda device to act like he was a hero when in fact he was nothing but a murder, but 20 of hijacker and i can't even begin to imagine what khalid sheikh mohammed what do is that trial was within the confines of the united states and isn't a military tribunal. >> i know that you have to be a loyal member of the administration all of you and i accept that. but i think it is a stupid approach to take when we have the facilities perfectly capable of taking care of these people and doing it in a way the military commission that makes sense, is legal after we correct the military commissions statute and totally acceptable it seems
to me. >> what the senator yield? >> that was a potent statement he made. recognizing these five men before are members of an administration therefore the implications they can only talk based upon what they had been instructed to say as opposed to being profound professionals in their field as opposed to what they might actually feel. so are you saying that what they've been told to say? >> i've been here 34 years but i can say i've seen administration after administration executives support their administration. i don't blame them for that. the budgets depend on it and there's other things, jobs depend on it have the time. i don't have a problem with that. madame chair if i could finish, but i do have a problem with is
i think it is stupid to put the whole country through this mess because the attorney general feels it might be a better way of doing things when in fact it is the worst way of doing things. >> if i may you are a good friend of mine, senator hatch, and i love and respect that friendship but i have got to correct the message that first of all the policy was established during the regime of ronald reagan and let me quote jerry brummer who was this presidents ronald reagan's first coordinator for counterterrorism in 1986. this is what he said in a speech in november of 1987 to the council of foreign relations in tampa. he said terrorists are criminals. they commit criminal actions like murder, kidnapping and arson and countries have laws to punish criminals, so a major element of strategy, and remember he is saying that on
behalf of president reagan has been to delegitimatize terrorists and get society to see them for what they are. that was the policy then. it was the policy of every president since that time. george bush, and i can do a chapter and verse on each individual when they were transferred from one custody to another. he had flexibility, he made changes, and now all of a sudden it is a huge political issue and i think it is absolutely wrong to do that. now i have had my say and we can move on. >> let me take a point of personal privilege. >> you may move on, senator hatch. >> i think this question of law, how you approach the law. whether reagan did that or not i don't know. all i was we didn't have 3,000
people killed in one day in new york city -- in fees three various incidents that occurred. these are vicious people. as i understand khalid sheikh mohammed said he would plead guilty and that he wanted to be executed so he could be a martyr for his people. i think even having said that he deserves at least an opportunity for a trial. but i think when you have the capacity of doing it in a place as good as guantanamo it ought to be done there and it shouldn't be brought to this country on our shores and i think you are seeing more and more people get upset about this and it's not so much a political thing as just a domestic security thing that people are concerned about. >> thank you very much. >> madame chair, i just have to add i don't think ronald reagan deserves to be in this
discussion. you talk about 1986, that was before the activities of the 90's and when 9/11 brought a whole new threat to our views. win 9/11 happened president bush took a number of actions. there are some i think where he's been proven wrong and i would hope we but learned from releasing detainees that was wrong. he made the right decision when he did treat jose as an combat but if we can't learn from our mistakes, no matter whether it is republican or democrat, we are doomed to commit them again and i just suggest we are not learning a lot and i would hope that we would have a different approach the next time in an enemy combatant land on the
soil. >> thank you. for the record, i am going to submit to to the record a list of individuals convicted under the bush administration in criminal court in articles 3 courts beginning with richard fried going back to omar bradley, zakaria yes, charged as well as so on and so forth, but these in the record. the point is a president should have flexibility to cite the venue for trial and it may be different for different cases and all i can say is those of us on this side of the aisle did not criticize president bush for doing this at this time and we view with some suspicion the fact that president obama is being criticized for following policy that had been established since 9/11.
i will now recognize senator whitehouse. >> -- the names of the people, the information released as results of these trials where we held the trials and i will discuss further i disagree with your characterization. thank you. >> senator whitehouse. >> i haven't been here 34 years. i've been here only three years but i find it extremely discouraging with these gentlemen before us, that of the defense intelligence agency, the head of the fbi, the director of national intelligence, the head of the central intelligence agency and acting head of the state department's intelligence service who i would add is the acting head because there's a republican blockade of the person slated for the position here more than a year into the obama administration that all of
this committee can talk about is where mr. abdulmutallab was mirandized and where the trials should be. there are so many issues important to the national security that these gentlemen have expertise in. i think it is clear the tradition has been strongly towards civilian trials. there is one person in the world incarcerated as a terrorist as a result of a military tribunal right now, hundreds because of the other come and get this question persists and persists and persists. it seems to be the only talking point on the other side of the ogle and because so much as it is fallacious we then have to respond in order to try to clear the record and then this whole hearing turns into a focus on a
point for which none of these gentlemen would need to be here and that does not bear on a significantly as other issues on the response of what is the have to discharge, so i say that and i will move to another issue which is your report, director blair, leads off with a discussion of the risks of cyberattack. to the country. and i want to read to you a couple of statements from a recent article in foreign policy magazine by joshua logan. he reported senior u.s. military officials believe, quote, the chinese government is supporting hackers that attack anything and everything in the national security infrastructure on a constant basis. he continues the defense department said the chinese government in addition to employee thousands of its own
hacker's manages massive teams of experts from academia and industry in cyber militia that act in chinese national interest with unclear amounts of support and direction from chinese people's liberation army. it seems that the anthology in cyber warfare goes back to the ancient days of naval combat when nations not only set out ships under their own flag to engage in warfare but also offered to private ship owners to pirates indeed letters of marque to go out and act in that nation's interest. what do you believe of the most important structural deficits that we have and need to fix in
dealing with state-sponsored cyber attacks on our country that either come through false flags or are hidden behind stations that are located all around the world in order to be able to detour these attacks and it makes a distinction between what mr. robie referred to as hackers that attack anything and everything in the national infrastructure on a constant basis and the brain drain that we face from wholesale industrial espionage stealing so that competitors abroad can take advantage without paying for the intellectual property they have stolen. >> senator whitehouse, the individual skills of a single
attacker whether he be doing it for fun or paid off by a criminal or implied by and intelligence service of another country you can have hackers' under all three of those scenarios. the ed advantage of a government or the characteristics of government sponsored attacks are more the focus on what they do and the ability to put together other forms of intelligence spies and humans they can use not just at the keyboard, criminals can do some of that individual hackers generally don't do some so the nature of this threat is pretty much the same matter who is doing it is the resources they have to put
against. >> those resources can matter a lot when it ends up to thousands or even tens of thousands of attacks daily and weekly. >> absolutely and that brings me to the second point which is that and as i sit in my statement, the general level of our defenses is just not good enough for either the monetary value of the intrinsic value what we keep on the net intellectual property and so on. now, our big international central banks to send billions of dollars across wires in network systems have developed tough defenses and spend a lot of money on them and put a lot of people on and continually check them and say can have high confidence that they can be secure against outside, outsiders and insiders are still a threat. there are many transactions that
involve extremely powerful information which people seem to think that a relatively simple password is enough to protect and even a hacker can get into major titles in companies and lots of commercial areas that haven't protected that at all, so i think we simply have to raise the game, spend more money proportionate to what we are protecting rather than just making it an add-on. do more training of people so that they are more skilled and take advantage of the techniques that are available if we put them there and apply them. i say if we do that we would be at the ninth, '95 level, 90-95% level of protection and after that it would take a very skilled and determined resources, time the attack in order to get in, but a lot of
the extremely valuable things are just available negative free and sophisticated hackers who do group force methods and they can be criminals are hackers or government agents. >> thank you. my time is expired. >> thank you, senator whitehouse. senator wyden? >> thank you, madame chair and all of you for your service to the country. we've had a number of closed sessions on the christmas day attack. i would like to talk about a couple of issues in public to get actually on the record what i think the country is especially concerned about. my sense is that the intelligence community is a good job collecting intelligence but has a harder time integrating it and analyzing it, and you all have talked about a number of steps through the course of the
afternoon. senator panetta, you talk about how people like mr. abdulmutallab are going to be looking for other opportunities and here's my question to the one to ask this of you director blair. if the events leading up to mr. abdulmutallab's attack were repeated over the next several months, how confident are you now that a new mr. abdulmutallab would be identified as a threat before he bordered -- before he boarded an airplane bound for the united states? >> i'm confident someone who left the trail that mr. abdulmutallab did would now be found even in the months since the 25th of december we have jumped a series of both human resources. we put more people on the problem. we have assigned them more
specifically and made more tools available the would catch abdulmutallab. with these improvements we would be able to catch someone who took more care and i would rather not talk about in open session but is more careful, more skilled could still -- >> you can provide insurance to the american people? what to ask the public that with the additional common to know, resources, with your effort to on pack everything that took place, you are now significantly more confident that another mr. abdulmutallab would be apprehended before he got on the plane? >> yes, sir. >> directors mueller, if i could i want to ask about this
homegrown al qaeda terrorist threat and certainly when you look at some of the high-profile arrests that the fbi has made over the past people like headley, this is something also very much on people's mind. you touched on it in your statement. how serious do you believe the threat of a homegrown al qaeda threat is today? >> i think it is a very serious threat and increasing principally because of the enhanced use of the internet to radicalize and be utilized to coordinate actions, and so it is a growing threat domestically. if you look at individuals like dell was radicalized by the internet the individual up in springfield, and vegetables in
charlotte, homegrown radicalization by those radical iced in the united states who do not and have not traveled overseas for training has grown over the last several years. >> are you more concerned about al qaeda terrorists coming from inside the united states now or from outside the united states? >> i am equally concerned probably about both, the same level of concern. i do think that attacks undertaken or by individuals who have some association war training overseas tend to be more of a threat in terms of the capabilities than some of the threats we've seen domestically. and so it is the training, the enhanced capability that come
from persons traveling overseas and then coming back that make any terrorist attack in more substantial terrorist attack in most cases undertaken by a long individual -- >> let me close the loop on this. you think it is a serious threat and would you say it is a significant threat as you see in great britain? >> i think to a certain extent in some areas we share the same concerns as great britain and by that i mean places like somalia and yemen and the ability of terrorists and those countries to identify individuals who can be trained in somalia, yemen or pakistan and then travel act to the u.k. the of some of the same problems particularly with a somali youth individual to be without jeff last year traveling to dalia coming back to the united states on the other hand
the u.k. has i believe a stronger network of individuals who haven't read aquinas' with close ties to south asia, closer ties to south asia than in the united states which present a different threat to the u.k. than to us. spinet what we turn to another subject for you, director panetta. do you or your associates have an estimate about would take to drive al qaeda out of the pakistani trouble aerias? i want to touch briefly on the question of pakistan and what is your assessment of what it would take to drive al qaeda out of that area? >> senter wyden, fast that a number of times because obviously our operations are very aggressive and very directed and as i said, very effective with regard to disrupting the operations. having said that, the reality is
that they continue to operate. they continue to move within the fatah and troy o'leary -- tribal areas. i think to effectively be able to disrupt al qaeda and into their threat we need to have boots on the ground in addition to our operation. >> one last question if i might, madam chair. what else, mr. panetta, can the pakistani government if pakistani leaders want to provide more assistance on counterterrorism issues? >> just what i said which is boots on the ground. they in fact went into south waziristan, that was very effective on bringing pressures on these groups. they had to move and scramble. that helped in terms of our operations. we need them to continue that effort. >> thank you, madame chair.
-- before, senator wyden triet samet terse no? >> thank you. thank you for being here today. i want to be clear because there's obviously profound concern, and i share the sentiment and the bond about the whole issue, issuing the miranda rights to a terrorist on christmas day and i think the american people need reassurance as well in terms of what is going to change as a result, you know, of what happened? and what is going to be the process going forward? because it seems to me in this instant it clearly should have commanded the attention of the highest levels of the intelligence community about whether further questions should be post to this individual to be certain the questions being posed were based on all of the information regarding al qaeda
and again in about this individual and putting it all together before issuing his miranda rights. and i think that is what is so disturbing here because that did not occur so it didn't seem to me and i don't think it seemed to the american people that was a cohesive, concerted effort determination based on all of the information that had been gathered and highly classified settings regarding al qaeda and yemen and of course this into the chapel and any associates and whether or not there was vital information that needed to be blamed and we won't know that now. and furthermore the administration said they were setting up a group called the high value detainee interrogation group precisely for this type of circumstance. has that been done and why wasn't that done? hauer rheedlen for? how was the intelligence community going to move forward
based on this particular situation that really does cast a shadow because we will not ever know about what could have been elicited from this individual because of who posed the questions frankly. you were not consulted, director of player, at the highest levels for any questions that should have been posed of this individual. and it seems to me it should have warranted consultation with you and others to be sure under the circumstance. >> senators know, if we knew all we needed to know about mr. abdulmutallab, a keyboard and have been on the airplane. it was a pop up, there were time pressures on christmas. i said to another committee the process bringing together intelligence and skilled interrogator is in the light of how we want to prosecute somebody as the absolute key the thing.
a form of that was done on christmas day. the joint task force fbi agents asked questions. i read the intelligence reports they put out and they were good. we have begun -- we have taken advantage of the time we now have in order to bring the full intelligence expertise into the support of the fbi in this case which will we hope bring even more intelligence that we can use. we have this high volume intelligence team bringing the files so that we get somebody we know about probably overseas and we can have done a lot of that homework senator bond referred to first. so the principal use intelligence committee is good and interrogators, make sure that we are taking the steps we need to to get them behind bars in the most effective way our what we need to bring together and we just need to do that fast and in the right way.
>> i understand the concern in terms of the public's understanding of what happened on christmas day. i also share your concern that in doing a thorough interrogation you have input from a number of sources, the background, the preparation and the like. but it also is important to obtain the facts as soon as you can add the time frame such that you do not have the opportunity to do that back, such as you would like. there were fast-moving even on christmas day. we took advantage and i say we, the fbi took advantage in my mind of the opportunities to gather that intelligence as quickly as we could under the constraints that we operate in and with a person who is arrested in the united states. i am along with director blair and director panetta believe the teams and individuals with appropriate background should be deployed to do interrogations'
and the protocol has been established and set up but we haven't written for that pravachol. we've utilize the teams already with had the for instance in chicago. we have a team of individuals during the follow-up questioning with expertise from a variety of areas and there we had the luxury of time and ordered to do it. we have teams established will be ready to go in terms of the instance where we will pick up somebody in a particular area of the world where we will have teams and to have teams ready to go to undertake those interventions we've done a lot in terms of putting together the teamster interrogate you also have to look what happened on christmas day in the confines trying to get intelligence on that date as to what was the immediate threat the american public faced. >> what were the fast-moving events of that day that necessitated issuing his miranda
rights, what was the russian the extraordinary pressures being faced? >> first of all, we had to determine whether there were any initial interview we did to determine whether other bumps on the plane had sort of tax contemplated, wanted to understand who the bomb maker was and directed him to read all of that came in the first series of questions. later that night we had another opportunity to interview him and believe that time not only would be able to interview him but we interviewed him in the way that we could utilize the statements to assure a successful prosecution. understanding that we have the obligation to take the individual before a magistrate with undue delay what would mean go before the magistrate within the next 24 hours so we sought to take advantage of that time to undertake the interrogations' we could what evidence we gathered at hand. >> why wouldn't it have been, i guess i am still not clear because i don't understand why we would want to issue the
miranda rights when we are worried about what ever subsequent defense might be occurring. >> we want to utilize and effectively prosecute them. >> i profoundly disagree with that and i think most people do given those circumstances. it just doesn't seem to me to make sense and frankly not having the collective weight of the intelligence community to zero in on this particular individual at this moment in time is disconcerting and troubling and i think that's the point. >> let me add one other point a that is it is a continuum. in other words you can look at it in that way the i encourage you to look what has happened since then. it is a continuum in which over a career goal of time we have been successful in attaining intelligence not just on day one that date two, three, four, five
and down the road, so i encourage you to look at it as a continuum as opposed to a snapshot of what happened on one day. >> thank you, senator snowe. senator reich. >> i want to engage in the political spiral we've had briefly to start with. first of all i think the questions by my colleague from oregon were very on the point wanting to know if the american people can be assured somebody like mr. umar farouk not be allowed on a plan again. i have every confidence you guys are right that you've got it figured out what this isn't going to happen. unfortunately most people if they are going to do this again day have the credentials this guy has got the of the record and you will see it again but that's important. as far as the article for free trial, i don't understand it and
whether bush did it or reagan or this president, when it comes to a combatant they are all wrong. article 3 core to put together for protection of a united states citizen. it is expensive to try someone in article 3 court. it is a great protection most of the world doesn't have. certainly people who come here that are foreigners that attack us are not entitled to an article for free trial so i don't care who made the decision, what party they are in, they are dead wrong. guantanamo is a political issue only because it became a political issue during the last campaign. everyone of us that from the arab world and what have you. the flash point for them isn't guantanamo is israel and i would like to associate myself with remarks from senator hatch. >> let's talk about miranda for a minute. i used to be a prosecutor in fact i was a prosecutor when miranda was decided. we thought was the end of the world. it turned out it wasn't but we
learned a lot of things. miranda simply the court said look, in america we are not in an inquisitorial criminal process. br and accusatorial criminal process. that means the government has to accuse you and prove it and you don't have to come up with any information to help them do it. that is what miranda was all about. again it was done for the protection of the united states citizens living under the united states constitution and not for foreigners. miranda is simply an exclusionary rule. i think most people in this room know what an exclusionary rule is. you don't go to jail if he were a police officer because you don't mirandize someone. the case doesn't get thrown out because you don't mirandize someone. the only thing miranda does is excludes any evidence the police got because they didn't give the
guy his miranda warning. let's take the christmas day bomber. somebody tell me why he had to be given his miranda for earnings. with all due respect, and by the way, thank you for all the you do. you have tough jobs and i appreciate that but with all due respect you didn't need to give him miranda in order to have a legitimate criminal prosecution. you had 200 witnesses that saw what he did. you didn't need a come session beat the -- convention. if you did mirandize and it couldn't be used in the court of law but who cares to review of all kind of witnesses who were going to convict him. i would hope you go back and look at this again and understand that the miranda rule is an exclusionary rule. number one if you are not going to try him in an article to report you don't need to miranda him at number two, if you have all the evidence you need you don't need to miranda him.
go ahead and interrogate this guy on till the cows come home because it doesn't matter. what you want that for its intelligence and if it never sees -- what ever he says never sees the light of day in the courtroom who cares, this guy is going to get convicted but with all due respect i think you lost some information that could have been very valuable to the american people. with that think you very much, madame chair. there's a couple minutes left, so maybe mr. blair, you are in the middle seat, if you want to comment on that. >> hi find the intelligence community is a lot of prosecutors on them. but i think that the balance we are trying to strike is interesting. i hear the same conversations inside the executive branch when we have our meetings on the same
subject. these are not easy matters and somebody would have found the absolute perfect way to balance the prosecution and intelligence value before now if it had been right there. these are balanced cases and we can talk about individual ones that we need to keep the tools out there. we need a process to think them through. we need to take advantage of whatever time we have and the circumstances of the case and try to do the best thing. >> mr. blair, but we disagree with you as far as the speaking in balancing maddock triet the question is whatever i get out of the guideline i needed in the court of law. if you don't need in the court of law there's no balanced is necessary or anything else. there is no reason. think about this, he came from a foreign country and he was able to accomplish what he wants or he gets a drug into the room by american authorities and he's sitting here thinking i wonder what is coming next.
i dolph know what these guys do but i bet it isn't pretty. and somebody comes in and says by the way, we are going to give you a lawyer if you would like one. this guy says have i died and gone to heaven? of course he's going to shut up. when you tell him don't say anything until you talk to a lawyer and we are going to give you a free one of course he is going to do that. with all due respect this isn't difficult. it's simple. do you need a statement in court or do you not need the statement in court and if you don't, bring everything you can out of that guy. >> may i add one thing? i don't disagree with much of what you said senator but i will say that you are looking at in the rearview mirror. >> a chris heat -- >> the decisions that are made, you were assuming that the point in time decisions were made we have a full understanding of the case which had against them and this is what, five, six hours afterwards, four or five hours after he has gotten off the plane so i don't disagree with what you say but by the same token you are looking at it in
their rearview mirror and if you put yourself at the time and the decisions you have to make at that time you may come down on the other side. . what he did and knew you had an air tight case against this guy. >> we were out interviewing that afternoon the passengers from the plane. but the results of those interviews, we don't get until late that night or the following day. the first information we have off the plane, when our agents are out there is sayin%å@ @ @ å this is a continue meant over a period of time. and what happens on that day
happens on that day. but do not discount what happened or what it does happen after that, in terms of gaining the intelligence. >> and that's fair. thank you, madam chair. >> thank you, sender. >> iowa state men's isp included in the record. >> in light of discussion this afternoon i want to know my strong support for the decision to try to leave sheikh mohammed and abdulmutallab in federal court decision i think actually demonstrates our national strength. director blair, on january 7, white house counterterrorism john brennan acknowledged quote we didn't know aqa p. i progress to the point of actually launching individuals here, unquote. do you agree with that statement? >> senator, we had some information that they have ambitions to attack the united
states before that point. >> and, you know, this strikes me as an area of strategic intelligence and perhaps the failure of strategic intelligence. and it's important i think that we acknowledge and address patch. and as part of this, even as we simultaneously work on how to improve the so-called connect the dots tactical capabilities. i just think it's important to see that as part of what happened. ct adviser brennan also said al qaeda is looking in africa for recruits and that the government is very concerned about this and is following up. i'd ask both the directors blair and panetta, where in africa do you see this occurring and are you concerned? we have a good enough handle on this threat tactic wise facts >> u.s. areas of principal concern are somalia and, you know, we have intelligence that
obviously there are individuals that are going to somalia, some cases u.s. citizens that are going to somalia and that are involved in training camps there. that's one area of concern. gammon is another area of concern as is obvious. and again, they are al qaeda has a presence and we have strong intelligence that's going to target those individuals. more importantly, we have intelligence that indicates there is a continuing effort to try to recruit somebody to institute some kind of attack on the united states. >> dr. blair. >> senator feingold, i think you're familiar with the organization al qaeda and mama grab which is based in the western africa and is i think what we're learning is that this
really is a syndicate al qaeda in the south asia, yemen, other places and that they in ways we don't entirely understand how people from one, abdulmutallab was a nigerian, 70 million muslims generally moderate in nigeria but obviously there isn't a number who can be radicalized to the point that she went. so what i'm finding it is to put in a geographic pigeonhole suspending our vision and maybe that was part of the limited edition that we had before. >> i think that's exactly right, mr. director. i appreciate you adding that to the items that mr. panetta vegan. i talked to the secretary of state about the countries in western africa where drug trade, perhaps in latin america is perhaps being connected up with
these things. and of course, your reference to al qaeda and the islamic is right in terms of northern africa. so i guess i'll go back to this comment about do we have the resources, do we have the capacity to follow these. these are credibly vast areas. in the conditions that allow al qaeda recruit in africa is the sign of problems that demand broader reform of the sorts i propose to this committee and if the senate has already approved and i'm hoping that can be completed and undertaken in terms of the commission in their future. until we integrate the intelligence community for the ways we openly gather information, radicalization will keep being one step behind al qaeda. we also may counterterrorism policies that are informed by what is actually happening in his countries. last of the state department concluded that the rebel and in yemen was distracting the government from counterterrorism.
witnesses have any concern as recent interest in ct will not be sustained or that fighting the rebellion are dealing with a southern secession will be competing priorities? director pineda? >> senator, the situation in yemen remains a volatile situation and other we have gotten strong support from president solemn to go after a target and to share opportunities to enjoy her that we are working together. he is besieged by situation on the border. he is besieged by what is happening in the south and the potential that they might divide from this country. so there are a series of problems they are that could very well consumed in the period this is not a clear-cut situation in terms of having his
support. >> thank you. director blair, her prepared testimony is refreshingly candid about the support for militant proxies and about the assistance provided by some of those groups to al qaeda. you also indicated that pakistan's actions are motivated by a desire of course to counter india, which makes pakistan strategic view of india central to our national security. i'm not convinced that the u.s. military operations in afghanistan are going to actually change islam abuts calculations in this regard. it's been something else going to have to happen to alter how they afflicted the region for the past 60 years? >> senator, in conversations with pakistani officials and their assessing them with intelligence, that intelligence experts, we think that historical foundation the site certainly provides the
foundation and the heritage of what they go into these decisions way. but, they are constantly reevaluating what is happening on their western border, what i think general kani, one of the key leaders said yesterday that what he sees as important in afghanistan is that it be a friendly state and stable states india's offer for example training to afghanistan armed forces in order to achieve that. so while the pakistani threat coming from india is historically -- while historically while grounded in mind that the caller of pakistanis concerned, i think they are realistic in terms of looking around and seeing how did the bacteria are interested
that framework are >> i all. >> i think we should probably begin to wrap it up. they may be some additional questions. to survive sterman, by virtue go-ahead and then i'll wrap it up. >> just a couple of quick things. i admit to having been on the government side and the defense side and a few criminal cases, but they do associate myself with the country lawyer from idaho, not only are there problems with the trial, but i also recall sheikh mohammed when addressed under arrest it said my lawyer and i will see you in new york. so if you were to be tried in new york which apparently not, it would be granting his greatest wish. now, turning to gitmo, it was
always my understanding that the many detainees in gitmo were never intended to come to the united states for trial. that's why we work in 2007, 2009 to get the military tribunals properly established. no moving along, mr. director, was very disappointed. overture month and half ago asking to consider some numbers for the past year of detainees returning to terrorism to be made public. i first got my answer via the media last night, when the letter from white house adviser, brendan, presented the house speaker which stated openly what we know is the recidivism rate was 20%. he went on to note that all those were from the previous administration, but putting aside all that and the fact that
it took us a line tend to get that answer. number one, i hope that the information will be forthcoming on a regular basis in the future, when i ask a question i'd like to hear from you in a more timely manner. but i do know that the detainees released prior to 2009 for judge to be the most re-habitable detainees they had. so i don't believe it takes a rocket scientist to realize that letting any more go would heighten the risk. do you have any reason to believe that additional detainees will not go through the so-called rehab programs or come back with additional information they can use to plan and execute terrorist attacks against the united states?
>> i think you're absolutely correct, mr. vice chairman, that the 500 some odd detainees who have been released before last year and then the 120 some odd that had been designated for release since then were probably easier cases and i've been personally going through some of these harder cases. and there's a fairly large number of them that you shouldn't -- >> i would hope they wouldn't be released. now, moving to the high-value detainee interrogation interrogation group that everybody is calling hague for sure. bundle the document be finalized and the committee get a copy of it and how this operation in place? >> sarah, -- is there, i signed
up on the charter it does require a number of sign-ups around the government. i look at when it would be available, but it's moving along and as director mueller said, we are using the components that we expect will coalesce into a subway right now. >> as i understand it from the executive order, that the hig is actually under control of the white house during national security council. is that correct? >> the body that makes the decision on deploying it is in the white house with representatives from everybody at this table. >> but it's the national security council. if osama bin laden were captured tomorrow, with the hague untracked hig interrogating, would he be that his interrogation rights? if osama bin laden were captured i would very much hope that the hig would interrogate them and squeeze all the information --
>> rather than randomizing him >> i'm not going to talk about that. >> director panetta, to what extent is the cia in the interrogation business at all? i've talked to colleagues who have gone overseas and met with commanding officers who when asked about who can interrogate them bring their lawyer and to get an answer because they don't seem to know. does the cia have any role in interrogation? if so, what is it? >> yes, senator, we are engaged with these teams and will he bring his obviously the intelligence value associated with the weather is being interrogated. but we do participate in those kinds of interrogations. >> so you've been participating in the hig? >> that's correct. >> how long has that hig been going? >> obviously, we have gone ahead and dispatch some of these teams
with the fbi, with the cia -- >> i didn't know that the cia or anybody else was interrogating people. how long has that been going on? >> were participating with the fbi. >> since when? >> since last fall. >> so you have been doing this? >> we have been doing it in anticipation of the formal signing of the document but the concept has been in place since last fall in abuses on a number of occasions. >> senator, the cia members are the backup. >> they are back up if they are doing some of the interviewing. >> if i may, the hig disapprobation will and has been deployed, correct? >> yes. >> thank you. >> undreamt senator rockefeller you have a question. >> i don't have a question, but just a comment because time is running out. the two things that i hoped to
discuss here today which we won't have time to do, but will have plenty of time in the near future is, number one, the two greatest growing threat within our terrorism community. one of 30 been discussed and that is the youth are believed by you, director pineda. and that is that abdulmutallab had no record. he was clean, had a two-year visa. he started when he was 22 years old. he was arrested when he was 23 years old. i see this as growing all across the world including in our own country, obviously because they are cleaned, because they cannot be traced. and for that reason, as director
of player knows, is a conservative mind that when these folks choose to travel and they pay in cash. and because they pay in cash, there's simply an interchange with somebody at an airport or a travel agent, nothing is known about it, just that they paid in cash. and you know, maybe checked luggage or didn't. so there has to be a way which we can work out that when somebody pays in cash, that the person at the counter for the person at the travel agency asks questions, get certain information from a person, social security number, telephone number, address, address where the person will be overseas. people won't like it. airlines won't like asking us questions. they'll think it is harassment
upon them, but there is no other protection that i know of for people who have a paperless trail. so that's one thing that concerns me greatly. and the second one we've also talked about another situations. and that is the fact that -- and think i've read it and putting about and articles that let's say the entire operation of bringing down the twin towers costs al qaeda about $500,000. and that with all of the poppy at dignity, the correction activity, the criminal gang activity, which interrelate with the taliban and pakistan with the taliban and afghanistan with others and a cross fertilize at some point because money is
money. also, so much money has contributed from foreign countries. we all know who this foreign countries are. the question as the financing of terrorism is to this senator a primary concern. i don't know how much is being done about it. i do know that i think that they can sort of do a twin tower every three weeks according to the amount of money they raise and i'm maybe just from the drug trade, the narcotics, much less the other types of financial resources that are coming to them just an overwhelming hundreds of millions of dollars, hundreds of millions of dollars. that has to be faced up to. and it's serious, it's hard, it's a hard thing to shut down because it's worldwide.
you're dealing with different people, not necessarily dealing with the terrorist themselves. you're dealing with people who facilitate. but now they become equally dangerous. they enable and that's scary. thank you, madam you, senator. senator white house to have a question. i believe that the senator and her opening remarks referenced the report that the committee is working on cybersecurity. i believe that the extent to which the country is under cyberattack is underappreciated by the public and i would like to ask each of you for your cooperation with a report and making timely decisions about declassification so that we can without compromising any national security information present information in the
report about the scale of the attack that we face in a meaningful way and in our time frame. i believe that will require some cooperation from each of you as to classifiers since nobody in the legislative branch of government is at the classifier and our procedure for declassifying information are so complex that i frankly believe they've never actually been used. so it will require your cooperation i'd just like to take this opportunity to ask you for your cooperation in accomplishing that. >> senator, will do that and madam chairwoman, if i could just clarify one thing in my exchange with senator feingold. i just had a chance to review the statements by mr. brennan that he mentioned and were not about spirit is a distinction between strategic and tactical attention and were both saying the same thing. >> thank you rematch. i bike just to clarify my understanding. my understanding is the high value detainee interrogation
team is in fact operative. that it has been deployed and that it will participate in any future interrogation. is that correct? >> that's correct. >> thank you mr. panetta. it's also my understanding that mr. abdulmutallab has provided valuable information. is that correct? >> guests. >> and that the interrogation continues despite the fact that he has been mirandized. >> yes. >> it is also my understanding that the no-fly list has been substantially augmented, is that correct? >> that is correct. we have added a number of names. >> can you discuss the definition for placement on the no-fly list? we discussed this and you read the definitions.
it took a philadelphia lawyer? >> we should do this type of paper which is required and i think it's a type of practice and interpretation of those rules and does direct your panetta said, we are interpreting those more aggressively right now because until we get a better handle on the situation with al qaeda independencia. so it's within the same words written on the paper, but it's more aggressive and flexible in terms of actually getting more names on the list when those are in a great area. >> and it's my understanding that the abuse of a chief of station will be taken into consideration, in terms of determining whether an individual should be placed on a no-fly list or watch list. is that correct, mr. panetta? i think that's very important and i'm delighted to hear that.
all right. i'd like to thank everybody. i bike to thank you for your service to the country. i'd like to thank your staff that i've worked on this. i know it's a very hard time in that the next six months are a difficult period. so the committee stands available to be of whatever help they can be. >> i was going to say before you close, excuse me, first, i joined with the chair and thinking you for your discussion i believe having been around too a little while and when we have these open hearings. one of the most important things are talked about issues important to the public. and while we've had very spirited debate on both sides, their strong disagreement. i think the public wants to hear from you, for both sides of the aisle on their views on this. so i find this a very, very helpful discussion.
it's difficult because good friends are disagreeing. but i think the chair for happiness in an open hearing and letting us pursue those. number two, i said that i believe that we have -- we have very strong interest on both sides of the aisle and making sure cybersecurity is pursued as an intelligence matter, but the american people understand just how dangerous these cyberattack fire for our personal bank accounts, credit cards, for the security of our infrastructure, power supply, water companies and all that and for national security. so when we find things that can be discussed openly, we will look forward to doing so and
finally, madam chair, i believe the record normally would stay open for a couple of days. >> it will stay open. >> surprisingly enough i didn't get to the questions. i would like to give our distinguished witness is an opportunity to respond to some of the comments that have been made by former attorney general makes the casey who was the trial judge in other cases and i would like to get your reaction to those. but i thank you manager for putting up with this and having a very spirited, interesting debate. >> thank you very much, mr. vice chairman. thank you, gentlemen. the hearing is adjourned. [inaudible conversations]
>> to do added to that do to >> good morning all. my name is ambassador saying the ambassador for the newspaper committee. it's a pleasur to welcome you all on behalf of the national press club with more than 3500 members worldwide. please visit npc that work our website for more details. i would now like to take your time as we have this newsmakers
event. new developments and now says space efforts. and we have speakers, director of the white house office of science and technology and nasa administrator charles bolden. i will new pass to mr. hold trend. >> it's my distinct pleasure to introduce you to a man who has excelled as a meme pilot and a leader of his peers and not demanding and dangerous profession as an astronaut, as a manager of high-tech agencies and enterprises, as an advisor to businesses, universities and philanthropies and now is a visionary leader of the national aeronautics and space administration, which he is restructuring into the science
centered technology advancing forward leaning institution that needs to be to meet the challenges and the opportunities of our countries that are goodies and space in the 21st century. but before i tell you a little bit more about major general retired charles s. bolden junior, what to say a few words about the challenges and opportunities in space. i start by noting that president obama realizes, i realize and general bolden realizes that our activities in space represent not just a grand and inspiring adventure of exploration and discovery of the universe we inhabit, but also an indispensable platform for observing what is happening in the environment of the earth below from the transformation of land and vegetation to melting ice and rising sea level, to the tracks of hurricanes and typhoons. a vantage point as well for monitoring potential threats to our national security.
an indispensable pillar of our communications infrastructure and geo-positioning capability and a source of new products, services, and jobs whose potential is barely beginning to be taught. u.s. strength in space science and space technology stands as one of the pillars alongside the vitality of our research universities and national laboratories, the strength of her education system from preschool to grad school and our information energy and infrastructures. the pillars that support this country's leadership across a range of science and engineering capability as we need for economic competitiveness, growth and job creation for clean energy and environmental sustainability, for a long and healthy lives for all of our citizen and for national and homeland security. u.s. leadership in human spaceflight compellingly asserted in the landing of humans on the moon in 1969 and in five more such landings
during 1972. and convincingly continued to this day shuttle program and the central u.s. role in the international space station has brought forth the bravest among us to venture into this ultimate frontier, has engaged some of the cleverest among us to develop the technologies for which they could do so and has inspired countless other young people to study science and engineering so that they too could reach for the stars. president obama understands all this with crystal clarity. he said so clearly and repeatedly and his campaign and he has done so repeatedly since. the decisions that were unveiled yesterday about the direction of the u.s. human spaceflight programs and nasa is other important programs of innovation, exploration, and discovery going forward were made with the greatest appreciation for the importance of getting this right here. they were made after a process
of extensive consultation with experts inside and outside the administration, the commissioning new analyses of the present cons of alternative strategies of the study of these new analyses than previous ones alike on the most careful reflection on the inevitable trade-offs, not excluding job losses and job gains in all the affected states. and i want to take a moment here to thank publicly, norm augustine, one of our country's most distinguished aerospace engineers and the other nine members of the independent augustine committee to view the human spaceflight plans which was formed to advise me the nasa administrator and the president on the pros and cons on the program of record and alternatives to it. the augustine committee was an all-star group that included three other aerospace industry leaders in addition to norm, two former astronauts, a retired four-star air force general who shared the national research council with recent study of the rationale and goals of the u.s.a. will place five program.
the former chair of mit's department of aeronautics and astronautics, my home department by the way. in the chair of the national research, studies board as well as the princeton university space scientist who served on president obama's committee of advisors on science and technology. this group supported by analysts at nasa and the aerospace operation worked tirelessly from june through october holding 14 meetings in three site visits in that period and receiving extensive input from members of congress, former astronauts, nasa officials professional societies and the public. their 150 page report with immensely valuable to me, administrator bolden into the president in clarifying the traces before us in many of its key findings are reflected in the new approach announced with a president that's why a loving budget yesterday. but that approach is what administrator bolden is here to talk about this morning and i'm not going to steal his thunder.
then we say only that i am can dance and president obama is convinced that the new approach on which administrator bolden will be elaborate in a moment is the right approach for this time, these challenges, these opportunities. it is not a retreat from u.s. leadership in human spaceflight as some are asserting, but rather an exciting and promising path forward that invest in new ideas, new technologies and the complementary strengths of nasa and the earth in order to make human access both to low earth orbit and to earth faster, safer and more affordable than it could have ever been on the old path. before i turn it over to general bolden to say more about that, just a few more words about him. born and raised in columbia, south carolina, charlie graduated from annapolis with a degree in electrical summits in 1968 and was commissioned a second lieutenant in the united states were in court. he became a naval aviator,
flying more than 100 combat sorties in a six-day intruder over vietnam, laos and cambodia earning a distinguished flying cross and air medal and a defense service medal among other awards. before being selected by nasa as an astronaut, is the beginning of the 1980's, he worked in a stint as a naval test pilot and earned a masters degree in systems management from usc. as an astronaut, he flew for space shuttle missions to escalate into a commander. these included the 1990's they shuttle, discovery mission that applied the hubble space telescope, 1992 flight as they shuttle and if that was the first devoted to nasa's mission to planet earth in the historic 1994 as they shuttle discovery mission, the first with the participation of a russian cost not as a mission specialist remember. in other roles at decides spaceflight itself, charlie
served as astronaut chief safety officer, lead astronaut per vehicle test and checkout at the kennedy space center, chief of the stacy at the johnson space center, special assistant to director of the johnson center and assistant deputy administrator at nasa headquarters. in june 1994, he left nasa and returned to active duty in the marine corps, initially serving as deputy comp.of midship len at the naval academy. subsequently he served as deputy command general of marine forces in the pacific, commanding general in charge of the ring forces in support of operation desert thunder in kuwait come a deputy commander of all u.s. forces in japan and commanding general of the third marine aircraft wing. he retired in august 2004 with the rank of major general. thereafter, he served in a couple of management positions at the private sector and on a number of corporate academic and philanthropic words before being nominated by president obama last year in conference by the
united states senate as the administrator of nasa. he began his duties at the nasa home last july 17. all i can say is what a career. and there is more to come. this is an individual who is demonstrated again and again that she is well and truly has the right stuff and i've no doubt that whatever he is bringing to nasa is change we can believe in. i give you the nasa administrator, general charles bolden. [applause] >> thank you very matched for the undeserved compliments in the introduction. john and i have become very fast friends in my time here in washington d.c. and i think he liked me in many respects were kind of strangers in this town. so understand things when i see them sometime because some of
them will come off wrong. and it's just because i'm going to talk to you the way that i would if we were in columbia, south carolina or in houston, texas or if you came and visited me at the station. he is looking at me like i'm crazy. i want to thank all of you for joining us this morning and i want to thank the national press club for hosting us. we truly appreciate this opportunity to share more details with you about the president's plans for nasa and america's password and face untracked space. before i go any further agitate an opportunity to publicly acknowledge people that i think sometimes don't get thanked enough and particularly over the last few days, depending on how you read what you've read, some people could say have been bashed a little bit over the last few days. and that's the team that has
been working constellations for a number of years. i happen to call most of them friends. and i consider them a member of the family. and so, i want to take this opportunity to thank them for their years of dedicated effort. you know, they're not hobby shoppers as some of you in the media have called them occasionally in the past few days. they are really dedicated to the service and contractors who have committed their lives and their focus on a dream of aggressive and bold exploration. yesterday, we and build president obama's historic budget that launched nasa on an ambitious effort to help us realize these dreams of the people in the constellation team. in a more sustainable manner, however, and we could go into why we're doing this, but you can read numbers as well as i can and i don't think i need to
dwell on that. you know, when you have a program that's just going to cost a fortune to resurrect, and schedules are getting harder to make without much more money and wisdom says you pick a new course and so that's what we've done. we want to explore new worlds. we want to develop new innovative technologies and foster new industries ever want to increase our understanding of earth, our solar system and the universe. among the many fresh proposals in the enhanced on commercial partnerships. today we have with us some pioneers in that field who we will be working with. and i'll tell you more about them in a moment. but first, i'd like to say how excited we are two of direction from our president to launch a new era of innovation and discovery. reaching and living in space is complicated. it's dangerous and it's full of unknowns.
the tech knowledge he we need to sustain our leadership as a space faring nation is going to take our ingenuity. but the president has not given us resources including $6 billion of new funds over the next five years for significantly increased technology research and development, a long-term plan to think big, to grow, to imagine and to move us vigorously towards the transport tomorrow. tough budget choices in the past have led to decades of under investment in space technology development. we have experienced cut to whether nasa -- critical nasa programs including earth science, earth observation, aeronautics, robotic space exploration, science, education and more. and we would have cut short the operational life of the international space station at the height of its promised potential. we believe that the technology sure if we face is so
fundamental that incremental change or tinkering on the margins will not be sufficient to address current or future needs. rather, a fundamental rebate claim he never nations exploration is needed. we must invest in fundamentally new innovations for space technology and new ways of doing business if we are to develop a space exploration and development that is truly sustainable over the long term. this plan gives us a roadmap to even more historic achievement of this verse in addition, employs americans and exciting jobs, and engages people around the world. it pledges us to a renewed commitment to invention and development in the creative and not you but the real spirit that is at the core of our country's character. the president has asked us to develop a detailed strategy for executing this plan in the weeks to come.
our goal is to revitalize nasa and introduce the reforms needed to lay a long-term foundation for the agencies continued excellence and success. to do well at this, the president has increased nasa's budget over the next five years an extraordinary show of support in these tough budgetary times. today several of our key partners in this future after it had traveled to washington to be with us. we ask them for their boldest ideas and concepts, the things that we would truly need to make commercial crew a reality. they give us some great proposals. this is by no means the end of this process, but it's a fantastic start. i'll let them tell you briefly in their own words about what's on the drawing boards in their shops. but let me also try to answer the question that many of you are asking. what will nasa gain from increased partnerships with industryo fly humans to space?
the initiative supports fosters the commercial spaceflight industry and its growing capabilities by leveraging private investment and reducing development costs to the taxpayer. it endures the commercial systems can safely -- and ensures that commercial systems can safely and reliably transport human to low earth orbit and draws on our existing nasa space flight experience and makes our specialist available to provide insight and expertise. with many bright finds working on our problems, we may soon have the prospect of multiple providers of space transportation. this would ensure that we have safe, reliable, redundant domestic capability. we do not have this today am a witch is the crux of our decision on our russian partners and the spacecraft and the reason we will have a gap in domestic human spaceflight
capability when the shuttle retires later this year. we wanted robust backup capability in human spaceflight and we wanted to be be made in america. where departing from the model of the past in which the government funded all humans beset dvds. this represents the interests of the entrepreneurial mindset into a field that is poised for rapid growth and new jobs. and nasa will be driving competition, opening new markets and new access to space and catalyzing the potential of american industry. this is a good investment for america. remember that we already depend on commercial companies to want all of our nation's most precious military and national security satellites. today, commercial companies launch all indications, weather, imaging, intelligence satellites upon which our life depends at home and abroad. a major benefit of this new partnership is the potential for
thousands of new high-tech jobs and spinoffs of other businesses that can support this industry and also take advantage of affordable access to space. there will be jobs in propulsion, communications and other industries. exploration probe trams drive innovation throughout our economy and nasa will be leaving this economic competitiveness and growth. there's a misconception that commercial brewed means putting our astronauts in the care of untested providers. quite the contrary. this would do the same providers who will be transporting our multibillion-dollar satellites. america's largest aerospace firms have for decades established expertise in human spaceflight and they too would be eligible to compete for this program. even new entrants will have demonstrated successful flight of the time they would carry astronauts in addition to cargo.
all of us travel on airplanes and we feel safe because we know the government has set standards and oversee periodic inspections for safe flight, safety concerns are even more serious. these commercial flights will have to follow the same safety assurances to which nasa holds itself here at as most of you know, i'm a former astronaut and have flown four times on the space shuttle. i don't personally know the great challenges involved in sending humans into orbit and love have lost friends and try to do so. i pledge to you that i will make it my job every day that everything is done efficiently and safely. i'm blessed to lead a team of nasa employees who are the best and brightest in government. and when my team commits itself to a goal, we have the will, the know-how and the commitment to attain it. we are also committed to doing right. as the augustine committee
reminded us in the recent report to the president, american commercial aerospace industry has always built the nations launch vehicles. over safety to your life, nasa is both a deep foundation of experience and knowledge with a wide range of companies. these companies have been essential to our successors from mercury to shuttle as well as with our robotic missions and multibillion-dollar scientific satellites. they have long demonstrated they can do the job. the augustine committee also said there is little doubt that the u.s. aerospace industry from historic for historical builders to the new engines has the technical capability to build and operate a crew taxing and they believe us to be that they have the capability to do this by as early as 2016. nasa itself has been mulling this idea for some time, believe it or not.
in fact, i was personally involved in work in the concept of commercial operation of our space transportation system as far back as my early days as a pledging astronaut in the early 80's. so it's not a new idea, but rather an idea whose time has come. the future is unfolding before us now and it couldn't be more exciting. with low-cost and safe safe transport to space, more people will be able to have a transformative experience with which i've been blessed. kids will be able to realistically envision a career that involves space, either going there or using it. as more of us travel into space, more will look back on our home planet with a special perspective that only space travel can provide. we will expand the global bonds we are already developing to the multinational partnership that is built into sustaining the international space station.
and with commercial companies providing transportation services, nasa will be able to focus on the greatest challenges that lie ahead in areas where we already have a stellar track record advancing cutting-edge technology and scientific discovery and pushing the boundaries of new frontiers on providing future explorers would dramatically greater capabilities than we have today. we start down that path now. we have with us today are too funded participants in the commercial orbital transportation services programs, spacex of california and orbital sciences corp. of virginia. they are both well on their way to demonstrations of cargo transport to the international space station and we look forward to their continued progress. today i am also pleased to give you more details about the $50 million that nasa is awarding 25 companies during open competition for funds from the american recovery and
reinvestment act of 2009, to support commercial crew development efforts. each awardee has also proposed significant investment from other sources to leverage the taxpayer investment. if a bold first step and while there are many vibrant companies with which we hope to partner the future, these five and are to participants are at the starting gate. they specialize in vertical takeoff and landing, life support systems, low cost satellite and miniaturized avionics. their payload specialists and daughters of robotic spacecraft and new markets that have never before existed. here's some more about five companies getting grants today. blue origin, located in cans, washington, is developing an new shepard, a rocker to the people decide to routinely find multiple astronauts into space
and offer free connected to these for researchers to play experiments in space and microgravity. blue origin will receive $3.7 million for risk mitigation act committees related to its development of its pressure launch escape system and to produce a composite crew module for structural testing. the space exploration division at the boeing company, headquartered in houston, texas, has been involved in the development of a new spacecraft systems including the x. 15, gemini, apollo space lab and the international space station. boeing will receive $18 million to develop its space transportation system which includes a seven person capsule that may launch on medium costs expended total. aircon space to build and corp. is a women-owned small business headquartered in tucson arizona. aragon has directly supported with spaceflight hardware more than 70 successful as spaceflight positions involving
the international space station, the mir space station, the space shuttle and soyuz. there was a 1.4 million of the environmental control and life support revitalization system. sierra nevada corporation of centennial, colorado, manufactures satellite, space tracking permits or repulsion systems. the company will receive $20 to further its transportation system including the dream chaser, seven person spacecraft to be launched on an atlas 5402. it is a joint venture of the boeing co., you la launches the expandable module and will receive 6.7 million for an emergency detection system to monitor vehicle health of atlas v rocket and delta iv rockets.
i'd like to ask the representatives of each of the companies to join me on stage and say a few words. ladies and gentlemen, these are the faces of the new frontier, the vanguard, we will certainly be adding this group -- adding to this group in the near future. the work has already started and we advance it one more step today. congratulations to all the winners. i'd like to ask each of our commercial pioneers to say a word or two. robert millman of new origin. brewster shaw. [applause] hold your applause until i give all the names. i want you to hear their names as he do that. i know you know most of it. brewster shaw, vice president of nasa systems. jane pointer.
jane poynter president and chair of paragon development corporation. like gas president and chief executive united states. snc space systems board sierra nevada corporation. david thompson, ceo of orbital science corporation and ken bowersox, vice president astronaut safety spacex. [applause] there you go. [applause] >> good morning. dr. holdren, administrator bolden, thank you. many miss michael gass president and ceo of united launch alliance did on behalf of the women and men we are incredibly excited to participate in this bold new era with our nasa
partners. united launch alliance has been supporting our nation for expand to launch vehicles with over 50 years of experience. our current generation of atlas vehicles will start with a 5 billion-dollar private investment to develop these new expendable launch vehicles and the atlas and delta will be utilized to support totally commercial crew in the future here this to project that we're starting to get the emergency detection system is all about her safety, to make sure we understand our system fully and to be able to give the appropriate signal for potential of work if necessary. this network will not only pursue our commercial crew but will be synergistic with our current mission of delivering highly reliable products for all of our customers. thank you again for this opportunity. >> good morning and thank you also for the opportunity to speak here. i'm robert moment with blue origin. blue origin is a small team and kent, washington group will swept website facilities in west
texas and the team is dedicated to creating technologies for an enduring human presence in space. in working with nasa will be working on two technologies in particular. we're developing a push or escape system. you may be familiar with a traditional tractor escape system involves the tower jettisoning. so will be developing an escape motor at the back of the capsule, which will avoid the jettisoning events and also because it will avoid consuming it on a nominal launch, it will lower operating cost. the other technology we're working on is a pressure vessel. this will be an all composite structure for containing the astronaut. it will improve the durability over conventional technology and also lower weights. so again, thank you very much for the opportunity. >> thank you. and tanks to all of you for being here and for your interest in america's human exploration