recognizes the gentleman from which is currently numbers,

unworkable.

>> the honorable member.

>> translator: mr. speaker, we now know between 2007 and 2008 the people were running real risks before the bridges closed this summer. it is an economic issue, but tls also one of public safety. it's irresponsible to play with the safety of drivers, truckers and those who use public transit. will the government take measures to insure that the people there can travel in all safety and security? the honorable minister of transport. [applause] >> translator: mr. speaker, the federal part of the bridge, because we have to really understand what the situation is, there were investments of $137 million, wok has been ongoing -- work has been ongoing for several years. we talked earlier about a provincial share of the budge, and the federal bridges in the

montreal region are in good shape for the people, and we make sure of that. >> mr. speaker, my question relates to the ongoing issue of anti-semitism. the government has, for example, been the first government anywhere in the world to announce that it would not participate in the -- [applause] my question to the minister of citizenship immigration is the following: could he advise the house as to any other action the government is taking to fight anti-semitism? [applause] >> first, i'd like to thank that member and mr. silva, the former member from davenport, for their leadership on indiana semitism as well as hoping us to coordinate the global summit here in january, and i'm pleased to nawns that this evening the minister of foreign affairs and

i will be the first to sign the ottawa protocol indicating that canada will continue to take a leadership role in combating all forms of anti-semitism which seeks to target and vilify the collective view of the state of israel. [applause] >> the honorable member -- [inaudible] >> mr. speaker, there is no business case for abolishing the canadian wheat board, it's an ideological crusade clean and simple, and now the clear majority of canadian grain producers have voted to keep the single monopoly. i argue that the minister is both duty-bound and honor-bound to respect the very acts that defined his ministry which guarantees a vote of --

[inaudible] before the government interferes with their ability to market their grain. [applause] >> mr. speaker, the member site that the wheat board overtook left out a glaring hole in the middle, the right for farmers to voluntarily choose where they should sell their grain, giving us the result to move forward with authority on that. we certainly spend to do that and give those farmers the right and the opportunity to market their commodities at a time and place and price that they see fit, the same as their cousins in ontario. >> mr. speaker, our american neighbors certainly see the benefit because 13 times they've gone to the wto to complain that it's an unfair competitive advantage. now our miner is of agriculture's going to do the americans' dirty work for them. my question is simple. through you, mr. speaker, what

side are you on? why are you standing up for the american agrifood giant and not standing up for canadian grain producers? [applause] >> the honorable minister of agriculture. >> mr. speaker, let me quote one of the farmers from western canada. it's no accident that north dakota -- we will continue to export unless entrepreneurs are provided the chance to bide grain freely -- buy grain freely. when i met with the minister of trade -- [inaudible conversations] he said the only mistake they made was not doing it sooner. mr. speaker, we look to that model, it's very positive for the farmers in australia. we though that the farmers in western canada will follow that model and have a much better chance of prosperity.

[applause] >> [inaudible] >> mr. speaker, the parliamentary secretary for the minister of foreign affairs serves a very important position which requires professionalism and discretion. eent event -- recent events have become a distraction. there are unanswered questions about the parliamentary secretary's judgment and potential security concerns, so my question, mr. speaker, is will the parliamentary speaker step aside from his responsibilities until the situation will be investigated? [applause] >> [inaudible] >> mr. speaker, the member has denied any inappropriate behavior, and we, of course, have found no information to suggest otherwise. >> the honorable member -- [inaudible] >> translator: mr. speaker, really foreign affairs must be treated with more seriousness, a great deal more, in fact.

while the minister of foreign affairs is taking care of the queen's pictures and the parliamentary secretary was taking care of his personal affairs, who is looking after the foreign affairs of this country? in the case we are told that an investigation behind closed doors has taken place, and he has nothing to answer for. could the opposition in the house have a copy of the report that was produced? thank you. >> mr. speaker, i'm not spirally sure what this has to do with professional business, but the members is quite clear, he denied any inappropriate behavior, and there's no evidence to suggest otherwise. >> [inaudible] >> translator: mr. speaker, the minister of industry promised that the hsd harmization in

quebec would be resolved by september 15th, it's now the 19th. they pulled the plug on the new squadron, there's no funding for the overpass and levy, we're still waiting for a new champagne bridge. why have they xed off quebec, because quebecers didn't vote the right way or -- [inaudible] why have they stopped taking care of quebecers? sphwhrt the honorable minister of r foreign industries. >> translator: mr. speaker, there was a fiscal imbalance, they've denied there was harm harmonization. we recognize the quebec nation. want more? well, they've done more than they have in the previous government. [applause]

>> translator: mr. speaker, canadians fail to understand how the funds allocated by parliament to improve border infrastructure were used to build gazebos and washers that had nothing to do with the g8 summit. even according to auditor general, this file is troubling. and they claim to have nothing to hide, will they accept a review of the fund by the standing committee on government operations? [applause] >> translator: honorable minister of foreign affairs. >> we've had a review that's issued by the auditor general, she came forward, made several recommendations on how to be more transparent. we've accepted all those recommendations. i say to the member opposite, this is the same old type of tactic that canadians rejected in the last election. they want their government to be focused on jobs, on economic

growth, on economic opportunity, and that's exactly what this government will continue to focus on. [applause] >> the hon rack member from halifax. >> it turns out he needs more time to consult with the oil industry. will the minister exlain to canadians why he's decided to take his sweet time while this government has already -- [inaudible] by a whopping 75%? [applause] >> mr. speaker, i welcome my colleague's question. we do have a plan, and our plan is working. as my colleague knows full well -- [laughter] we began with a sector-by-sector regulatory approach a year ago starting with the transportation sector which is the greatest emitter of greenhouse gases. i have just posted in the canada baa seth, one, new regulations

for the coal-fired and electricity sector, and we will proceed sector by sector from here around the wheel of priority. >> well done. [applause] >> the honorable member from halifax. >> translator: mr. speaker, the governments has done nothing better to do than to cut 800 jobs of the department of the environment. cuts in a strategic sector for our economy, social development and for our future for all of us. this will not be without consequences for canadians, mr. speaker. on the basis of what analyses did the government consider the results of the cuts for canadians and to canadians? [applause] >> translator: first of all, mr. speaker, i must correct the -- [inaudible] uninformed comment on this issue. there's a great difference, mr.

speaker, between 776 permanent employees who might be affected, 300 positions which will be declared surplus and the much smaller actual number of employees who may eventually be separated from the department. none of the core services of the environment cabinet will be compromised, the priority remains a key. >> order. the honorable minister from winnipeg -- sphwhrt i want to thank you, mr. speaker. 2011. the union representing air canada flight attendants served 72 hours' notice to strike, a strike that could take place at 12:01 wednesday morning. because air canada plays such a vital role in the canadian economy, could the myster of labor, please, give the house an update on the status of labor

negotiations at air canada? [applause] >> the honorable minister of labor. >> thank you, mr. speaker, and i want to thank the honorable member for her question. mr. speaker, in cases like this best solution is always one that parties reach themselves. n., both officials and i have been engage with the the parties. now, we have received strike notes as the member said, and we are very concerned that a disruption of the air service will damage qanta's economic recovery. -- canada's economic recovery. canadians want us to focus on the economy, so that's why if there is a work stoppage, mr. speaker, we will act to protect canada's economy. [applause] >> mr. speaker, the conservatives intend to cut 120 service canada processing centers down to 33 over the next -- 22 over the next three years. this government's plan to shift jobs out of rural areas into high urban areas makes no sense.

as soon as canada -- [inaudible] jobs we cannot afford to lose at a time when canadians need their government most, why does this government continue to cut, cut, cut instead of focusing on jobs, jobs, jobs? [applause] >> [inaudible] >> first, during the global recession the number of applications to employment really spiked. to make sure canadians got their e.i. payments in a timely manner, we hired additional temporary workers: the good news is we're leading the world in jobs creation. there aren't as many applications for e.i., so we don't news those temporary workers anymore. so we're honoring our objectives to use their dollars wisely.

[applause] >> [inaudible] >> mr. speaker, the canadians have learned about these cuts to service canada, and what we know is that these jobs are very important in terms of speeding up the processing of employment insurance claims. we know that there continues to be a backlog in many of the areas around canada, so will this minister explain to out-of-work canadians why are they making it harder to access a program that canadians have paid into? [applause] >> mr. speaker, we want to insure that canadians do access the services to which they're entitled in an effective and efficient manner. we have a mandate from the canadian people to make sure that we provide our services efficiently. up until now it's been mostly done by paper, so we're trying to take a giant leap forward into the 21st century. we're automating a lot of this because it's a responsive and responsible way to deal with it. mr. speaker, no service qanta in-person services are being cut

through this program. if we want to make sure that we are responsive to canadians, that they get their payments quickly, accurately and in a responsible way regarding their taxpayer dollars. [applause] >> [inaudible] >> mr. speaker, canadians from coast to coast were horrified when keenan -- [inaudible] was abducted from his home. no family should have to endure the fear and uncertainty when their son was taken from them. to their great relief, keenan was returned safely. [applause] mr. speaker, our government is committed to keeping our streets and communities safe and to protecting our most vulnerable. could the minister of justice, please, inform this house on how the government is acting to strengthen canada's justice system and keep canadians safe? [applause]

>> i want to thank the honorable member for his interest in this, and we all join in wishing keenan -- mr. speaker, we've taken concrete steps to protect canada's most vulnerable, we've raised the age of consent from 14 to 16, strengthened provisions for dangerous offenders because we believe those who commit violent crimes should serve sentences which reflect the severity of their crimes. the government put victims first, canadians know they can cawnt r count on this government. [applause] >> mr. speaker, ten years ago the governments of canada, ontario and toronto jointly created and funded the agency of water front toronto for the purpose in part of developing portlands in a socially environmental way. ready for implementation after rigorous consultation with the city. now the mayor of toronto is

seeking to take control of the agency and implement his own plan. can the minister of finance confirm his promise to stick with the current plan for the portlands? [applause] >> mr. speaker, not only can i confirm the commitment of the federal government, in fact, the commitment was $500 million, and about $492 million of that money has been spent. in fact, most of the projects that have gone ahead including the park, canada's sugar beach were done primarily with federal money on the toronto waterfront, so we've supported the project throughout it time of advancing. i understand that the mayor of toronto and waterfront, ontario are having some discussions, and i expect that they'll come to an amicable resolution. [laughter] [applause] >> translator: the honorable

member -- [inaudible] mr. speaker, the leader of the government said this week that he strongly intended to retable a bill to amend the composition of the house of commons by increasing the number of seats while saying that quebec was trying to use blackmail by not wanning to see it number of seats go down. is this respect the government has for the quebec nation? >> mr. speaker, each canadian vote to the greatest extent possible should be, should carry equal weight. we will be taking reasonable and measurable action to restore fair representation in the house of commons including protecting quebec's constitutionally enshrined -- unlike the opposition, we are governing for all canadians, and we will pursue what is fair and principled. [applause] >> today a couple of programs on

the economy. starting with the senate budget committee hearing on president obama's jobs plan. you'll hear remarks from a former white house budget director in the clinton administration and a former white house budget officer for george w. bush. and that's live at 9:30 a.m. eastern on c-span3. then a joint economic committee hearing on the effects of the federal debt on the u.s. economy and job creation. and that's live at 10 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> today on c-span3, testimony from a north korean prison camp survivor before the house foreign affairs subcommittee on human rights. also a look at north korea's nuclear program. that's live at 3 p.m. eastern on c-span3. >> william jennings bryan, one of the best known speakers of his time and the first politician to campaign from the backs of railroad cars and automobiles. he changed political history.

he's one to have 14 men featured in c-span's new weekly series, "the contenders," live from fair view in lincoln, nebraska. learn more at c-span.org/the contenders. >> the c-span networks. we provide coverage of politics, public affairs, nonfiction books and american history. this month look for congress to continue federal spending into november including funding for recent natural disasters. keep tabs on the testify sit committee as they form late a plan to lower the debt, and follow the presidential candidates. it's all available to you on it's, radio, online and on social media sites. search, watch and share all our programs anytime with c-span's video library. and we're on the road with our c-span digital bus and local content vehicles, bringing our resources to local communitieses and showing events from around the country.un it's washington your way.

the c-span networks; created by cable, provided as a public service. >> both homeland security secretary janet napolitano and fbi director robert mueller testified about terrorist threats and the 9/11 anniversary. newly sworn-in counterterrorism director matthew olson also spoke during this hearing which is about two hours and 40 minutes. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

knox 2340bgs. [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] >> the hearing will come to order. welcome to ourd distinguished panel ofreta witnesses. secretary napolitano, director mueller and for the first timeot very happy -- first time confirmed, happy to welcome the new director of the counterterrorism center, matthew olson. olson. this past weekend in ceremonies and vigils across the nation, we stopped to remember the nearly

3,000 people killed ten years ago in the attacks of september 11, 2001, and to appreciate the acts of heroism and service by countless americans on that day and every day since to protect our homeland and defeat the violent islamic extremists who attacked us on 9/11 and drew us into the war that we are in. the 9th anniversary of 9/11 last year didn't get, obviously, the same degree of attention, and either will the 11th anniversary next year, and in some sense, that's why we're here this morning. this annual status of the threat against our homeland hearing with the heads of these three critically important agencies has become a tradition of our committee, and senator collins

and i wanted very much to hold it after 9/11 to look back a little bit, but really to look forward and to make the point that our work goes on, our work to protect the homeland goes on. even though we had fresh warnings that alerted us over the past few days, over this weekend of comeme ration of a specific confirmed threat, there's already evidence that in a quite natural reaction, the people are beginning to forget how real the threat of islamic extremism continues to be. there was a gallop poll taken last year that showed terrorism ranked at the bottom of six concerns, six choices that people had to make in this country, understandably probably because of the intensity of the

economic concerns that we had. ranked behind economy, jobs, federal corruption, spending, and health care. and in a different way last week a study published by the cato institute calling for an abolition of the homeland security returning us to where we were pre-9/11. we may be the victims of the success that has been achieved in protecting the homeland since there's obviously not been another mass casualty terrorist attack on american soil since 9/11, something a reality nobody would have predicted on that day. some have taken this lack of another large scale attack as further evidence to them, anyway, that the u.s. government exaggerated the danger posed by islamic extremism and

overreacted in the wake of 9/11. i believe this is a profoundly mistaken and ultimately irresponsible conclusion. we have weakened our enemies, and we have protected our homeland, but our enemies are not vanquished, and that's why our vigilance has to be constant and not limited to the understandable public attention given to a particular anniversary. as the senate committee on homeland security, it's our responsibility to make sure our national focus is not distracted from the threat for our witnesses and the thousands, tens of thousands of people who work with them. it is their constant responsibility 24/7/365 days 5 year to protect our homeland, so we welcome them to this annual threat hearing, and we thank them for the service and for all that their respective agencies

have had to do with the fact that we have not had another major terrorist attack against our homeland in the past ten years, but the violence islamic extremist ideology that motivated the attacks of 9/11 remains a poe tent force though weakened flout the world and increasingly though, of course, seems to have an effect in the radicalization of home grown terrorists incoming lone wolves. today, we've asked our three witnesses to help us answer at least three big questions. one is to take a quick look back to the extent with the u.s. government and what their agencies have done since 9/11 to, of course, the focus of this hearing is to discuss the current threat, the status of the threat of islamist terrorism to our homeland, and then the

third is to discuss what our government current sly doing to -- currently 1 -- is doing to counter that threat, so for me the question today is not are we safer than we were on 9/11. i think it's self-evidently clear that we are safer. the question is what are we doing and what we should be doing to ensure that safety continues to be what it is and be greater in the face of the threat that we continue to face. the ten year anniversary of 9/11 has passed. the media and public attention will naturally fade, but this congress and future congresses, and this administration and future administrations must stay focused on the threat and its ever evolving tactics until the ideology is truly vanquished and

gone. senator collins. >> thank you, mr. chairman. the state of of maine became forever linked to the attacks of september 11th, 2001 when two of the hijackers, including the ring leader, mohamed atta, boarded and early morning flight to boston at the portland, maine jet port. from logan airport, they set in motion the worst terrorist attack in our nation's history by seizing control of the american airlines flight 11. that evening, members of congress gathered together on the steps of the capitol to express unity. a day that had begun in shock and anger ended with unity and resolve. we resolve to ensure that our

country had the tools to detect and detour future plots as well as to identify those who would do us harm. when chairman libberman and i awe -- lieberman and i authored the reform of prevention of terrorism agent in 2004, our government was to create a strong leader to coordinate the 17 separate agencies of the intelligence community and to change their culture from need to know to need to share so that next time the dots would be connected in time to stop and attack. the operation that killed bin laden reasonable represented the kind of successful collaboration of intelligence and operations that we envisioned, information is now being shared more

effectively, both across the federal government and among federal agencies and their state, local, and tribal part nors. -- partners. just last week, dhs and the fbi announced a specific, credible, but unconfirmed threat related to the 9/11 anniversary. thed administration is taking 24 -- this threat seriously and appropriately so. it has shared information and intelligence with state and local law enforcement officials at the targeted locations and others across the country. thankfully, there was not an incident over the weekend, but we must consider whether this particular threat has truly passed or whether the terrorists have just gone to ground. we must evaluate for how long should we remain on heightened

alert. this threat demonstrates yet again that the terrorists have not abandoned their quest to harm our country and our people. they continue to probe for vulnerabilities. much has changed in the past decade. we have vastly improved the sharing of information across the agencies at the federal level and with state and local emergency and law enforcement professionals. america's chemical facilities and sea ports were especially vulnerable a decade ago, and we took important steps to safeguard them. in the case of last week's terrorist threat, the decision to publicize the threat put millions of eyes and ears on the lookout for suspicious behavior on the eve of the september 11th

commemoration. we continue to expand our see something, say something law. the legislation that we've introduced would provide further protections against lawsuits for citizens who report suspicious activity indicating potential terrorist threats. when it comes to our homeland security, however, we truly are only as strong as our weakest link. as we saw in 2009 with the christmas day bomber and major hasad's attack years later when warning signals are ignored or overlooked, our security is placed at risk. the tsa has strengthened airline passenger screening. nevertheless, a young man was

recently able to fly across country without a valid government issued id and with an expired border pass that did not even bear his name. similarly, the department of homeland security has bolstered the security of americans' borders and identification documents led to refugees with ties to al-qaeda were arrested in kentucky to help allegedly carry out attacks against our troops. how a known bomb maker whose fingerprints we had had for years was able to enter our country on humanitarian grounds remains an unanswered and troubling question. it appears, however, that this case may reflect the kinds of lack of imagination that the 9/11 commission found to be a persistent failure.

while the fbi's announces iring's ed's collected in iraq and afghanistan has up doubtedly helped u.s. war fighters, the forensic information collected from these devices should also be used to screen those trying to enter our country, and we must ensure that the fbi has the resources necessary to do that job. we must ask this question -- are there other iraqi nationals granted asylum involved in attacking our troops? i know that the administration is reviewing the files of more than 51,000 iraqis admitted under this refugee program, but it's deeply troubling that we're still awaiting clear answers from the administration. home grown terrorism is another

challenge and evolving threat. this committee first sounded the alarm about home based terrorism five years ago and has held more than a dozen hearings on this topic. over the past two years, 31 arrests have been made in home grown plots by american citizens or legal, permanent residents, and enormous increase compared to the previous seven years dating back to 2001. yet, the administration's strategy for countering violent islamic extremism is insufficient to meet the threat. we shall never forget those whom we lost on september 11, 2001. as has been noted often, the terrorists only have to get it right once. we have to be right every time

or suffer the consequences of an attack. we are surely much safer than we were a decade ago, but we must be relentless in anticipating the changing tactics of terrorists. as a successful long decade search for osama bin laden proved, america's resolve is our most powerful weapon against those who seek to destroy our way of life. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you very much, senator collins. secretary napolitano is first, but before she testifies, the department of homeland security held a departmental commemoration of 9/11, and i was able to attend outside on the plaza of the reagan building

here in downtown washington, and the department showed a video made by people within the department about its history, particularly on that day, and i thought it was very impressive, and for me, moving, and i asked the secretary if she'd bring it today, so i'm sorry not everybody in the room can see it -- maybe that screen over there, but whoever's in charge of the machine at this point, please turn on the video. it's only about two or three minutes. ♪ >> ten years ago, our nation suffered the worst terrorist attack in our history. we all remember the great sense of shock and sadness we felt that day. >> all of us remember where we were on that morning of september the 11, 2001. >> some of us lost family members, friends, colleagues, loved ones, and people we admired. >> nearly 3,000 lives were lost including citizens of more than 90 countries and of many faiths

and backgrounds. >> that day changed us as americans, as a people. >> it brought our society together with a remarkable theory of unity and changed how we look at threats from terrorists and led to major changes in government and led to the creation of this department, the department of homeland security. >> this september 11th, we remember those we lost, and we celebrate their lives. >> and we we commit to the -- recommit to the ideals of service and sacrifice. >> and support for the lives changed that day. >> america's stronger than we were a decade ago. we bounced back from the worst attack on our soil. >> we built a culture of resilience and will protect ourselves. >> our experience over the last ten years has also made us smarter about the threats we face and how best to deal with them. we used knowledge to make us resilient, not just with terrorist attacks, but threats and disasters of all kinds. >> the thanks goes to you.

>> the men and women who work at the department of homeland security. >> every day you rise to the challenges that have been placed on us. >> dhs is there. you are there. rain or shine, day or night. >> in the washington area -- >> in the field or in one of more than 75 countries around the world. >> we're all part of the same team working tirelessly working to protect america. >> protecting our hometowns, communities, and neighbors. >> one dedicated group of individuals. >> we are -- >> proudly one dhs. >> as we mark the anniversary of one of the most tragic days -- >> we note to the great accomplishments. >> of the young department. >> i want to express my deep appreciation. >> and my gratitude what you do every day to keep the country

safe. >> and so say to every one of you, thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> well, i thought that was great. i hope my colleagues on the committee did. it really -- there's such a powerful statement of the unity. i thought it was wonderful to include secretary's ridge and chertoff in it and all the sense of unities and resolve. i appreciate it very much, and with that, please proceed, secretary, with your testimony. >> well, thank you. thank you, chairman lieberman and senator collins, and members of the committee. i obviously appreciate the opportunity to testify today on the department of homeland security's efforts to keep our nation safe against ever evolving threats. this weekend, our nation observed the 10th anniversary of 9/11, and we honored nearly the

3,000 innocent victims as well as their friends, their colleagues, and their families. we saluted the many first responders and law enforcement officials who responded with such courage and conviction on that tragic day and in the days that followed. while these past few days remind us that we must remain individual lent and prepared as threats against our country remain, the recent anniversary of 9/11 is also a time to consider the progress we've made. as chairman lieberman noted, america is a stronger and more secure nation today. we bounced back from the worst attack on our soil, and we have made progress on every front to better protect ourselves. we used our experience to become more resilient, not only to terrorist attacks, but to threats and disasters of all kinds. following 9/11, the federal government income -- including many members on this

committee moverred -- moved quickly to develop a security framework to protect the country from attacks from abroad while balancing capabilities to prepare for, recover, and respond to attacks here at home. a key element of the new security frame work included the creation of department of homeland security, and over the past ten years, dhs and its many partners across the federal government, across public and private sectors strengthened the homeland security enterprise to better mitigate and defend against every present and ever evolving threats. perhaps the best way to illustrate the progress we've made is to apply today's security architecture to what existed when the terrorist attacks of 9/11 occurred. the 9/11 plot, like many terrorist plots, began overseas which means our security layers

must be beginning 24 as well. with respect to intelligence, planning for 9/11 began several years before the actual attacks. bin laden's summoned operatives to afghanistan and discussed using commercial aircraft as weapons. we strengthened the depth intelligence enterprise to get the information to where the operation may occur. with respect to visa security, all the 9/11 hijackers applied for visas overseas. today, the dhs visa security program deploys trained special agents to high risk posts around the world to conduct targeted in-depth reviews of visas before they reach the united states. ..

serious agreements and more are under way. after 9/11 the federal government discovered that information exist about the hijackers well before and after they came to the united states but disinformation had not been coordinated, shared and analyzed. since 9/11, the federal government along with its state, local, tribal private sector partners has made significant improvements to enhance information sharing and analysis with respect to targeting the

federal government and dhs in particular has become more effective at analyzing travel related data to better understand and anticipate the travel patterns of known or suspected terrorists. this analysis has been an essential in identifying targeting and interdicting known and suspected terrorists and prompting additional screening before these individuals travel to the united states. we've established 72 fusion centers with a service focal points for the receipt and of discovering and sharing of threat related information among the federal, state, local cultural territorial partners. today the intelligence community is able to identify the common threads that can tie a seemingly minor crime to the larger threat picture and all but a few of the fusion centers are now connected to the hs d m which is a secret level real-time data system shane zearing data across the

country. once the 9/11 hijackers made it to the united states, they still required access to aircraft. with respect to flight schools part of 9/11 the hijackers in the world of the flight schools and conducted cross-country surveillance flights. today the tsa screens all foreign students seeking flight training against terrorist criminal history and immigration databases. with respect to passenger screening, ten years ago the nine alleged hijackers were able to purchase tickets and boarding planes carrying weapons. today, through the secure flight program, dhs prescreens 100 per cent of the 14 million passengers flying weekly to, from command within the united states against the government watch lists and senator collins i think i can elaborate that that would have if it had been deployed prevented the situation that you refer to with of a boarding pass. moreover, transportation security officers at more than

450 airports now screen all checked and carry-on baggage for explosives, weapons and other threats using cutting edge technologies and with respect to be if your detention, even though some of the 9/11 hijackers were randomly selected for additional screening and a roast of suspicion of gate agents they still need to launch a plan. tsa's behavior detection officers today work to identify potentially high risk passengers who exhibit behavior is that indicate they may be a threat to aviation security and refer them for additional screenings. the last line of defense against the aviation security is on the plane itself. with respect to the airplane security today, all commercial aircraft have hardened the cockpit doors and federal air marshals are deployed across the aviation system based on risk. with respect to emergency communication, limitations and

communication and interoperable the iman air-traffic control operators, military personnel and first responders hinder the response on 9/11. our nation has since made significant investment and training and technical assistance to improve emergency communications capabilities to read each of these lawyers come by and creates a stronger security architecture that did not exist on 9/11 and that helped keep our nation, our transportation system, and the american people safe over the past ten years. we would not be where we are today without the direct involvement and support of the congress and particularly this committee. i want to thank you for your support from your guidance and you're continued oversight. we continue to engage the broader homeland security enterprise in the nation's protection. we've made great progress but more remains to be done. thank you.

>> thank you, said it in public. i particularly appreciate the pre-9/11 comparison to today because of documents in a very tangible way the progress we've made, and it in 62 vindicates the conclusion that i've come to over the years and it's a very painful one which was that 9/11, 2001 could have been prevented and should have been prevented, and that is if it was tried today it would be prevented and that's a very important thing to be al jazeera. director's mueller, thanks for being here. talk about change as compared to the department of homeland security didn't exist on 9/11 as the american institution it has gone through a dramatic transformation in the last ten years under your leadership to become our domestic

counterterrorism agency had really first-rate at that and also we thank you for agreeing to stay on for two more years as i shall also thank your life for allowing you to stay on. [laughter] please proceed with your testimony. >> thank you. good morning mr. chairman and senator collins, members of the committee, i think you for the opportunity to appear here today before you. as it has been pointed out since september 11th, the threat from terrorism has evolved in ways that present new challenges for the fbi and our partners and today the threat environment is far more complex and diverse than ever before and in response to the fbi has undergone on president of information over the past ten years as mr. sherman, you pointed out. we have developed new intelligence capabilities necessary >> we have createdto thee administrative and technological structure to meet our mission ad

a national securityif agency.r i and we have made these changesg while continuing to safeguarde h american civil liberties. continuing to safeguard american civil liberties. let me begin by focusing on the most serious threats we face and then discuss how the fbi has changed since september 11th to counter these threats. al qaeda in the arabian peninsula and its leader anwar al-awlaki have shown a commitment not only to attack the united states but also to inspire act of terrorism for overseas or from overseas. the past two years it's taken a tax directly targeting the homeland. we saw this with a failed attempt sent package bombs to the united states on cargo planes and in the attempted bombing on christmas day the year before. anwar al-awlaki and the leaders reaffirmed their commitment to this attack. they also continue to emphasize operations in the west and have sought to radicalize individuals

over the internet to carry all the attacks here and in europe and despite the recent counterterrorism success abroad, and there have been many, cord al qaeda also remains committed to the high-profile attacks directed at the west. we saw this with the 2009 plot by a zazi in the subway and we confirmed this from the material seized on osama bin laden's compound last spring. as you know we continue to track the current streams from al qaeda, threat streams that became public last week and pakistan such as ttp have similarly shunned an attempt to target the united states to release all this when they claimed responsibility for the times square at him to the bombing. and we remain concerned that all of these groups encourage radicalized westerners particularly u.s. citizens to travel to east africa for the training with the potential to

return to the united states to conduct attacks. of course the threat from home from violent extremists is among the most serious terrorism threats today. individuals may be reckless over the internet even if they do not receive direct guidance or training from a terrorist group. these individuals may have diverse backgrounds and life experiences as well as different motives. increasingly, many acting alone and for these reasons, and violent extremists are harder to detect and to disrupt. and the fbi along with the partners in ctc, department of homeland security and the other law enforcement and intelligence communities are focused on these threats more than perhaps eight, nine, ten years ago. and force the fbi remains concerned about the domestic terrorist threat as well. economic and political issues could motivate white supremacists and militia extremists to violence and as

you know, domestic terrorists connaughton operate as the defenders were small cells which are difficult to detect. over all the threat environment has evolved significantly since september 11th and is more complex and diverse than ever before. this requires the bureau and partners to change and not constantly to address these threats to the as you pointed out, mr. chairman, the fbi has undergone an unprecedented change in the years since september 11th. today the fbi is a stronger organization as a result, and we continue to focus on the national security threats as our highest priority. after september 11th, the deutsch boesh of the 2,000 agents from criminal investigations to the national security matters. over the years that follow we centralize management of counterterrorism and intelligence operations headquarters to avoid the stovepiping of information.

structurally we created the national security branch in 2005 to consolidate and integrate the tero's overall national security mission and engage senior executives the authority to accelerate the integration of intelligence and to the national security operations. we established the director of intelligence at the headquarters to manage our intelligence programs nationwide and create field intelligence groups to prioritize and each of the field offices to prioritize intelligence collection in each of the field offices and we hired and trained thousands of new analysts and agents on the capabilities to read the following september 11th, the fbi agreed the increased the number of joint terrorism task forces and the task force is operating around the nation and we now have more than 100 of those task forces. the task force's bring together the expertise from our federal, state, local partners and this cooperative effort has led to numerous successes and disrupting terrorist plots and

threats since september 11th. after september 11, the fbi also recognized the need to recruit, hire and train the intelligence analyst condra necessary to meet the requirements of the national security mission. in 2001 the bureau had one doesn't, approximately 1,000 intelligence analysts and fewer than 30 analysts to read to the bureau was triple the number of intelligence analysts to more than 3,000 we have more than 270 supervisory analysts. let me as an aside emphasize the fbi role of countering cyber attacks. one of the most significant complex threats facing the nation. the intelligence law enforcement capabilities the bureau is positioned to investigate and disrupt cyber intrusions' and our need to counter the cyber tax cuts across all of our programs including counterterrorism, counterintelligence, and the criminal programs. beginning in 2007 we worked with

our partners to establish the national cyber investigative joint task force which now includes 24 turtle and intelligence community agencies. through these partnerships the bureau has identified investigated and prosecuted an unprecedented number of intrusion cases and these intrusions of and directed the military, other government agencies, the financial and communications sectors and other critical infrastructures. addressing this cyber threat will be among the fbi's highest priorities now and in the years to come. let me conclude by thanking the committee for the continued support of the men and women of the fbi and support for our mission as it has evolved to read this is essential to our transformation and our ability to meet today's diverse threats. as the psychiatry said i would be happy to answer any questions that he might have to read some of thank you very much, director. we look for to the question period if you.

welcome. obviously counter to the conventional counterterrorism centers on of the most significant new entities created in the government to put it simplistically to make sure the botts are connected but obviously does much more than that so this is the first appearance before of but confirmation and we welcome you. estimates before. german lieberman, ranking member, some members of the committee, good morning. as we begin with me thank you for taking the time to meet with me during my confirmation. i appreciate your counsel and support. i'm honored that my first hearing of the director of the national counterterrorism center is before the committee that authored the legislation creating in ctc. i welcome this opportunity to discuss the evolution of the terrorist threat and the collective efforts to address that threat. i am also pleased to be transitory napolitano and director mueller this morning and it's appropriate we continue to reflect on the data that the nation suffers the worst terrorist attack in the history.

after a few weeks as the director of the nctc i can report the center is a national asset and its conquest of dedicated and talented intelligence professionals representing a wide array of perspectives experiences. i'm also proud to leave the center continuing the work of andrew, mike leiter and my testimony today reflects the thoughtful and a rigorous analysis of the expert work force at nctc. today's hearing asks the question to years after 9/11 our receiver and chairman lieberman as you said the bottom line is we are safer than we were ten years ago. but al qaeda and its allies and affiliate's continue to pose a significant threat facing the school and the hard work of the thousands of men and women and intelligence of the homeland security, diplomatic of law enforcement communities as well as the men and women in uniform who made significant progress in the fight against terrorism with the support and guidance of this committee in congress we've built an enduring

counterterrorism framework. f ..thtion of the fbi and the creation of the montreal to the commercial center to replace pressure on the leadership, denied the group safe haven, resources and as a result, kallur al qaeda is weekend but a decade after the september 11 attacks we remain at war with al qaeda to read it's a resilience and active adversary and we continue to face any fault for this director mueller mengin from its affiliate and endurance. in the balance of my remarks i will briefly describe that terrorist threat and then discuss a bit about the role of the nctc and the challenges we face. first al qaeda's core capability to conduct attacks has been significantly diminished. again, chairman lieberman in your words weakened but not a question the group remains the ideological leader of the global extremist movement. it continues to influence others through propaganda. al qaeda as senior leadership has advanced several unsuccessful small-scale western

faults in the past two years and these highlight and its ability to continue attack preparations while understand counterterrorism pressure and just the past week we acted in response to the unconfirmed intelligence possible threat the group was planning attacks in the united states. we remain concerned that al qaeda may be plotting to strike against the united states at home or overseas. further since el pais relocation to pakistan has encouraged its militant allies to expand the operational edge and as to include u.s. and western targets both within the region and overseas. for example, faisal shahzad's attended bombing is a stark reminder that the allies continue to threaten the u.s. interest in afghanistan and pakistan region. additionally ten years after 9/11 we face a much more diverse and i used the threat from the group's affiliated with al qaeda to read these affiliate's has increased the scope of the operations seeking to strike

some u.s. and western targets with inside and outside of the respective regions to be the single most capable of fully it is al qaeda and the arabian peninsula or aqap. the recent gains in the government alleges increase our concerns about the group's capability to conduct attacks. for the propaganda efforts are designed to expire like-minded western extremists to conduct attacks in their home countries. aqap's attacks against the homeland, the head of the airliner attack in december, 2009 and its attempt to down the cargo planes in 2010 showed that the group is a determined and capable enemy that is able to adjust the dhaka. the evolution of the threat since 9/11 is the advent of the homegrown extremists as you mentioned ranking member collins to read these individuals are inspired by al qaeda as agenda and the past three years we seen

an increase in the violent extremist english content online. this has fostered greater cohesion among the homegrown violent extremists. propes destructive in the last year appear to be unrelated operationally but may share a common cause rallying independent extremists to attack the homeland. the key feature has been the development of the narrative that addresses the unique concerns of the u.s.-based extremist. the narrative includes a blend of al qaeda's inspiration, perceived victimization and the glorification of homeland plotting. the independent attacks with no direction in side of the united states or overseas are difficult to detect and disrupt and could advance plotting with no warning. now turning to the rolph nctc. as the terrorist redefault of the past decade so has the government's ability to counter that threat. nctc has proven to be a vital element of the government-wide effort to counter terrorism. first as you know nctc is unique

responsibility to examine all international terrorism issues to risk and geographic boundaries so that we can analyze intelligence regardless of whether it is correct inside or outside of the united states. nctc has access to the fall catalog of the reporting both foreign and domestic on terrorism issues. last year nctc had the pursuit group to develop tactical needs and pursue the terrorism threats, pursued group analyst with connections among the less obvious details to help ensure the terrorist threats are fully examined. nctc continues to implement important reforms in the watch listing process. this includes better processing and sharing of the information or watch listing experts within the pursuit group or the fbi and with the department of homeland security to expedite the sharing of information and to build more complete terrorist identity. nctc also conducts strategic operational planning for counterterrorism activities. in this role nctc looks beyond the individual department and

agency missions to the development of a single unified counterterrorism effort across the federal government. we did the plans to help translate high-level strategies of policy direction in to the coordinated activities. finally, as the committee is well aware the center continues to be the home to the interagency threat assessment and coordination group to read the group is led by the dhs and in partnership with fbi and brings together federal and ma federal intelligence law enforcement first responder communities to bridge the intelligence information gap between the traditional intelligence agencies on the one hand and state and local and private sector partners on the other. i would like to close today by identifying the most important resource and that is our people. as we redouble the effort to meet the terrorist threat, our progress depends on maintaining and developing our talented and diverse work force. we bring together professionals from across the government to focus on the single mission, counterterrorism and we must

strive to work collaboratively to share information and to integrate our efforts. finally come of direct these must be consistent with our core values and the protection of privacy and civil liberties and everything we do nctc must retain the trust of the american people as it fulfills it's critically important responsibilities. chairman lieberman, a ranking member collins and members of the committee to for the opportunity to testify today. as you know perfection is no more possible and counterterrorism than it is in any other endeavor and we always strive to improve the leadership's support and direction have been in valuable helping us move for to carry out the mission and to work with results to protect the nation. thank you. >> thank you, director very much. we will go to the questions now and start with a first-round of seven minutes for each senator. let me begin by bring to the threat stream that alerted everyone in the government and the nation last week as we approached the tenth anniversary. it was described as specific

credible but unconfirmed court and corroborated. let me ask you first what is the status of the review of the threat now? do we consider to be an ongoing threat from sector napolitano, director mueller, whichever? >> chairman lieberman, i will refer to director mueller but yes, we consider it an ongoing threat. we continue to lean forward into conforming that threat. >> it has not been resolved and until it is resolved, it is an outstanding threat that we are following up on even though september 11 has now passed we do not believe that that necessarily means that we should back down and consequently the department of homeland security and the intelligence agencies are pursuing that as heavily as

we have in the last several days and we will continue to do so until that is resolved. >> sifry free here you treacly it remains confirmed by the intelligence stream was specific and credible enough that you are not prepared to dismiss it? >> no. >> do not add anything to that? >> i share the views of the director and secretary. we are not prepared to see that it's been resolved and we continue to work to analyze it and share information about it. >> i would like to add one thing if i might that is since we first got word of that threat we have conducted hundreds of interviews. we've been pursuing a number of leads, and consequently, as a result of that, we have been able to eliminate some aspects where we thought we ought to be looking in order to determine whether it was indeed a valid threat but there is still work to be done.

>> that's reassuring for my perspective. i was struck and i know there were plans already well in place to be it federal, state and local to be prepared to defend against another terrorist attack on attempting and with regard to the home grown radicals but others as well. i was impressed by the extent to which so many of the assets that our government has now in regard to homeland security counterterrorism were brought into action on this threat that we really i don't think would have been able to do ten years ago. one of these things that the 9/11 commission said is when they asked the question who is in charge of counterterrorism or the particular response to the terrorist threat they didn't have an answer. so, from my perspective it looked like you were all really

working together very well, but i'm interested in who was in charge because at some point somebody has to be overseeing all of this. so who would you say is in charge? >> you have on the one hand of the intelligence agencies, the domestic agencies operational, dhs, fbi and the like all of whom we have been through this before. any number of times, and the relationships and the organizations come together very quickly given our history but i would say in the white house and the office of the national security adviser it makes certain that everything has been taken care of generally through nctc as the operational support arm but there is no question about the source of the leadership and the coronation and that's why we have been over

the years effective in terms of coming together and sharing information, understanding our differing roles and complementing each other to make certain the job gets done to resolve the particular threats. >> that's very interesting. so the deputy national security advisor mr. brennan is involved in counterterrorism and homeland security acting on behalf of the president in charge of fuel and coordinating our assets but that the nctc plays an operational role on his behalf to you to comment on that mr. olson? >> yes, sir. i would say as you put it, john brennan put the coordinating role on behalf of the president in the last few days in response to this threat and our role at nctc is to be the place where information comes together because some of the information is coming from the cia, as coming from fpi. lots of information coming from

dhs. we play a central clearing house world where we take all of that information come analyze it and share what we are seeing from the analytical standpoint. >> secretary, you want to add to that, does this sound right to you? >> it is an amazing coordination that might seem and i don't think would have been able to accomplish ten years ago. it is ultimately coordinated out of the white house. we all understand how we fit together. sometimes it's difficult to articulate and know it when you see it, but it does seem to increase our ability not only to share information among ourselves, but it's important that we get information to the country and receive information back, and that also is a difference between now and ten years ago and i can say that ten years ago when i was the attorney general of arizona, and it was very difficult to get information as to what was coming on with the attacks and

what decisions were going to be made with respect to the air safety from airports, borders and all the rest. now that dislocation doesn't occur. >> i want to ask you one additional question and probably the most visible part of the change in the homeland security since 9/11 for most americans has been the presence of tsa at the airports and i think that they have done a great job. as you know, it is an annoyance to people but they put up with that, and before this committee mr. pistole indicated the department would like to move away from the one-size-fits-all approach to a more risk-based aviation security strategy to really wanted to ask you what the department is doing to implement the risk-based strategy and whether the moves

would be made soon in that regard. >> i was fortunate to take director mueller's number to move him over to tsa commesso thank you i owe you -- with respect to the tsa, we do want to live and are moving to a more risk-based approach of the screening passengers to try to streamline procedures for those passengers who are low risk which enhances the ability to focus on the passengers who we either don't know or who are at high risk. we are piloting several programs to achieve these goals like now. one of them is the expansion of the global gentry, which is essentially a program to facilitate international travel. it's a prescreening of a passenger and those who have just a million passengers a couple weeks ago releases of petites coming in and out and crossing borders.

we have been pleading also programs to deal with children under the age of 12 with respect to not only taking off their shoes but also pat-down procedures and we hope over the coming weeks and months we will be able to begin rolling that out. it does require additional training of all the thousands of the tsa officers and that's under way. we are obviously looking at some of the other things, procedures passengers need to make to streamline the process through the lines. there will always be some unpredictability in the system and there will always be random checks even for groups that we are looking at differently such as children under the age of 12, but i think the traveling public will begin to see how some of these changes really in the coming months. >> that's good to see. in the foreseeable future if i hear you correctly we may be

moving to a system where children under 12 would not normally be subject to pat-down and the light to respond to devotee additional training for the different pat-down procedures for them and then also again, allowing them to leave their shoes on. islamic excellent. that's good news. senator collins. >> madame secretary, i want to go back to the bowling green case which was very troubling to many of us on this committee. as i look at the overall statistic, the dhs interviews more than 101,000 iraqi refugee applicants and approved more than 84,000 for resettlement in this country. there is an approval rate that exceeds 80% and i was surprised

at the scope of this program. 58,810 iraqi refugees have been resettled here and are living here. now, i know from the previous dhs testimony and from my conversations with the director that there is the review of those that are here to make sure that we have not missed fingerprints or other data or intelligence the would indicate that eighth mistake was made in granting them the right to resettle in this country. but that leaves 25,625 who have been approved for resettlement but have not yet been resettled in this country. so my question is is there a hold on that population until

they can be more stringently vetted to ensure we are not flooding into the country people who would do less harm? >> let me if i might answer in two parts. first with respect to the 56, 57,000 who were resettled pursuant to the original results and program. they have not been reveted against all of the dhs databases, all of the nctc databases and the department of defense biometric databases, and so that work has now been done and focused. >> completed? >> that is completed. moving forward, no one will be resettled without going through the same sort of debt. i don't know whether that equates to a cold as you say but i can say that having done

already resettled population moving forward, they will all be reviewed against those kind of data bases. >> director mueller, it is reassuring to hear that those 58,000 individuals had been vetted against the existing database but in fact due to a lack of resources and the fact that this is not an easy task to do the matching and the lifting of the leading fingerprints don't you have a considerable backlog of fingerprints that have yet to be uploaded in to these databases? >> as we discussed there is a prioritization in terms of the explosive devices that we look at, and with that prioritization there's a substantial grouping of devices that haven't been looked at. we are taking the precautions of

assuring that we maintain the capability of looking at it down the road and in other words assuring if there are fingerprints they can be recaptured down the road. but as you pointed out before it's a question of resources and we do have to prioritize. if we do get an indication of the name of a person who there's a question about we can do that much thorough review in going into this third tier to determine whether that person's fingerprints appear on any ied but requires a triggering of information in order to go to that ' to read and it's not just a small grouping as i think you understand it is substantial. and so, regardless of whether the resources should be given and what resources we can do more, nonetheless, there would be a ultimately the grouping that we just cannot applaud for a variety of reasons. >> but what concerns me is in the case of one of the individuals arrested in bowling

green, his fingerprints were in those low were pretty ied parts; correct? >> correct. we have to go back and identify where it was sent to the additional research and i have done that and will continue to do that. >> but that depends on you getting the lead or the name of an individual where you can try to map out where that individual was as opposed to the dhs being able to run the fingerprints against the complete database; correct? >> they can run the fingerprints against the database but the database will not have that information from the third tier that hasn't been uploaded because of the vast amounts of the devices we have and the necessity to prioritize. >> and that third tier again happened to be where the

fingerprint of the individual from kentucky were located. madam secretary, i want to talk to you about the fusion center. i have been a supporter of the fusion centers i visited one of them in a large urban area and one in a rural state and i have seen the information sharing that they do and i've been impressed but my enthusiasm is not shared by everyone. there are individuals on both sides of the ogle that argue that the fusion centers are duplicative of the joint terrorism task force to read why do we need them when we already have this multi agency task force particularly in a time of budget constraint. senator warner's essentials letter in june on that issue, senator coburn's subcommittee is

looking at the effectiveness of the fusion centers, and i know that the dhs has conducted a study to identify baseline keep the peace that every fusion center should have. so tell me why we should have fusion centers. >> i can speak both as a former u.s. attorney general and governor has to the utility of the fusion centers. they do not duplicate. they complement. their portals of entry where we can share information, and as i mentioned in my opening comments all but three we are now connected at the secret level and get information back as the director mentioned and then director mueller, of the phenomena we are dealing with now was the growth of the homegrown terrorists and the so-called loan actor were lone

wolf. we need more on is on the ground and the federal government itself can supply. the training and ability to share information about tactics and techniques, early trips that should be looked for can be very, very helpful, and it's not just sharing information, senator that is important with respect to the fusion centers, its sharing analytical and expanding analytical capability to the different levels of government. so we now have the 72 fusion centers. we've moved our own analysts into the fusion centers themselves so that they can help my only the gathering and the receipt of information but the analysis of information and that itself is helpful and if you look at zazi and faisal shahzad connected with jihadi jane and all of those cases you'd see the fusion center activity that is very helpful and indeed this past three days with the ongoing

threat has been described to you fusion centers are active in that as well. >> thank you. >> thanks, senator collins for the information and senators will be called in order of arrival as follows. senator brown, carper, johnson, pryor and mccain. senator brown. 64 mr. chairman. >> here is a three part question. several of the reason that the terrorist attacks against the u.s. have been carried out by were inspired by aqap. how would you assess the threat to the homeland, would you put them at top of the list of the threats by terrorist organizations and then as a follow-up is yemen on its way to becoming another afghanistan safe haven for aqap to plot a tax and to we have a sufficient strategy in place for yemen? >> thank you putative reports to that question, the first is that

aqap is certainly among the biggest concerns from the counterterrorism perspective. it has shown itself to be to have both the intent and the capability of carrying out attacks against the united states and the homeland. i mentioned the two examples of that in christmas day 2009 and in 2010. beyond the actual attempted attacks one of the biggest concerns we have about aqap is its propaganda efforts. anwar al-awlaki, dual u.s. citizen has transpired magazine sought to inspire western request westerners. the actual issues of inspired magazines have included step by step on making instructions.

>> that is my next question. how do they get away with that? how do you get away with putting the bomb instructions in the magazine to be disseminated by? can you tell me that and mr. mueller, the same with you. >> it's not something that in other words, that information is put out in an online magazine over the internet and -- >> there's no control over anything like that? >> certainly some of that information is not necessarily unique to aqap at one of the biggest concerns of the nature of the information is that it's quite basic. it's easy to follow. it doesn't require something to be sophisticated to follow those instructions. in your question, yes come aqap is the top of the list and one of the biggest concerns we have. whether yemen is a safe haven we are very concerned about the ability of the young men who government at this point to sustain the strong

counterterrorism efforts given the government's challenge is that it faces. so aqap has had the opportunity to recruit in sight yemen and to plan and a plot to incite young men in a way that we put extreme pressure on the senior leadership it's more difficult to put that same pressure on aqap leaders in yemen. spinet on the inspire magazine in particular -- >> we are not without tools. but the fact of the matter is once you upload something or want to applaud something on the internet, it is exceptionally difficult to try to eradicate it and in fact i would say impossible. so while we do have the tools, the likelihood, the possibility of erratic eating from the internet understanding it's not just the united states with every country around the world it is virtually impossible and to the extent that we have some

capabilities to address that is probably something we should talk about not necessarily in an open session. >> madam secretary, in your testimony you said, and i've heard you many times talking about the nation's borders and protecting us from the legal entry especially your neck of the woods where you are from i know it is of great concern to senator mccain a lot of the other border states and quite frankly i couldn't agree with you more. in massachusetts alone there are several tragic cases of residents been killed by persons in this country illegally and free were never heard from, but it really has to stop, and thus secure communities the secure community's program is something of a believe -- i don't want to miss state but probably you are in favor of. you worked wards and would like to see implemented. how do you deal with states -- for example my state where you

have a governor or others who don't support it? is there a way to convince them more control them or incentivize them to really get with the program so to speak? >> senator brown legalize support secure communities. i think it is a key tool in our immigration enforcement efforts to identify those in the country illegally and are also committing other crimes of the bristol fugitives from existing wars, multiple illegal entrantss, security concerns. we have to find demand going to the jails and prisons is a logical first start. >> you can't do your job without cooperation from individual states or people in charge. how do you do it? >> there was some initial misinformation. the plain fact of the matter is

the interoperable agreement between dhs and the fbi so that when someone is booked and their fingerprints are run through the fbi there's also a connection where we run them against our immigration database to flag someone before they are rest back into the community. it doesn't require the specific agreement of a state or locality in order to deploy secure communities. it is helpful when we have that. so i am using my powers of persuasion to speak with the governors or mayors or other officials who have been troubled by the program. >> doesn't make sense for me if -- americans first. we are trying to -- especially when we work together, and we tackle a problem together, we usually prevailed. i am encouraging others that i

know back home in massachusetts and for robert country to remember we are americans first and to work together on these very real terrorist threats and concerns. by providing -- if someone is arrested and killing people whether it is through accident or basic murder and mayhem we should get about and do it with the cooperation of all government entities. >> secure communities, it was begun under my predecessor. we have deployed it now for about the country. we have it in 1200's sites and we will have it in every jurisdiction by fiscal year 13. >> thank you. >> could i ask a question? mr mueller pointed out your american citizens being trained and using their knowledge to come back. what is the status in the terrorist expatriation that you and i and several columns and

others -- are we going to refile that? >> i would be happy to refile that but it continues to be a problem. why don't we do it? >> thank you. i want to mention briefly in terms of what you do about extremist material like inspire magazine or other things sunni internet. what director mueller said was true. there are limits on the federal government but what we have discovered and gone over is that the major sites like google and a fewtube and web blotter and facebook obviously. if individual citizens and complain about a particular site having violent material on it, they all have standards and people whose job it is to review complaints like that.

on many occasions let me say that i have at least one staff member who exercises his individual citizen rights in the office to complain about these, and they take down those jihad web sites which is quite remarkable. the problem and glory of the internet is they can pop up somewhere else. >> as the president and urges us to call as i encourage our citizens if they feel compelled and move to do just that. >> pretty easy to do on those websites. >> senator parter. >> welcome, nice to see you. thanks for your willingness to sign on for longer tour of duty. we are grateful for that. nice to see you as well.

my colleagues heard me tell this before but it is worth repeating. i will take this question in a different direction. two months ago we had a hearing in the finance committee. the subject was deficit reduction. one of the witnesses was alan blinder who used to be vice chairman of the federal reserve when alan greenspan was chairman. let's be serious about health care costs in this country, medicare and medicaid and addressing health care costs. we won't get a handle on the deficit. thanks for your testimony. we are doing q&a like this. you said earlier if we don't do it in about health care costs, we are playing around the edges. he said that is right. what would be your advice? what should we do?

he said i'm not helping the economists. here is my advice. i urge you to find out what works. that is all he said. find out what works. more of that. and i said to correlate that would be finding out what to do after that. i think the same is true across government as we deal with a budget deficit. we are happy that it is down. only $1.3 trillion by the end of the year. but the red ink as far as we can see everything we do we have to look through a prism that says a way to get a better result for less money or a better result for the same amount of money. i would ask you today to talk about some of the things we are doing that are working. we need to invest more money and things we are spending money that had a lot to our security.

>> secretary, would you go first? live with balanced budgets and govern your state. >> thank you. we had to balance the budget every year. first of all, i resist the notion that some redundancy is wasteful. in the areas with which we deal some redundancy is helpful because there is always the possibility that someone or something will get through one of the many layers that we have. we have to evaluate redundancy differently in this arena than in some others. secondly, we always have to plan for some human error in the universe in which ideal which is who or what can get into the country and how do we know who or what is in the country. so one of the major improvements

we have been able to accomplish in the last several years is to merge more databases to look at admirable travel patterns and the like, share that information that we can share with the fbi and with the nctc when we are pulling this threat of a threat. that is an improvement we want to continue to make more robust and link up with the fbi and nctc and other agencies around town. >> director mueller? >> i would like to add from two perspective. internally everyone of us are looking at where we can make savings, contractors or cutting down in a variety of ways. we have to continue to to 40 foreseeable future.

more importantly is prioritization and real prioritization. not everything can be a priority. for us it is programs we have, particular crimes and frets we see out there and prioritizing our efforts and to ensure when we do that there is a metric for success as opposed to just indictments and the like. how is that -- >> we're pretty good at measuring process. we are not all that good in government and out comes and results. >> that is enough perspective. in the federal government particularly in our line of work the ability for information technology to provide novel is the information we need but support for that information to bring what we really need which is something we are all undergoing. it is part of having a federated surge capability to do searches across a variety of databases

both internally and externally. by doing that and developing that information technology capability we will save a tremendous amount of money but more particularly we share the information across agencies and have the ability for analysts to do the kind of federated surge -- search that does not require another one. that is the key to information sharing in the future but also doing it in a financially responsible way. >> mr. olson, want to add anything? >> the rest of the intelligence community looking at ways to be more efficient in how we use our resources. i would make two points. the first follows up on director mueller's. we are seeking to create a counterterrorism data layer which is to take in all of the data we can from dhs and fbi and other agencies and to be able to

take advantage of advances information technology to be able to surge -- search across the data to save money. instead of doing searches manually where you log into one system and log in to separate system having all that information available so you can search would variety of databases and make connections you could not otherwise make. the other initiative would identify no real resource expenditure which is we set up as i said in my opening statement pursuit groups which are analysts looking for tactical level for connections that might not be obvious and taking that information those connections and handing those off typically to the fbi and the dhs to lead up on that. that is an area where we are focusing particularly in the aftermath of the christmas day attack in 2009.

>> let me conclude by recalling the words as we begin a new football season, vince lombardi used to say if you are not keeping score you are just practicing. in -- another way of saying that is what we measure we manage. the idea of looking throughout the federal government to see what is working and what is working well how can we invest more money and what is not, a little less money there. secretary napolitano, there are two governments operating without financials. what is the department of defense. the secretary will try to get there by 2017 and put people as hard as he can. we want to help him. your department is making good progress. i am understand this is something you put a priority on and i urge you to keep doing that. this guy on my left have been pushing the idea you had a tool as governor and line of the

dough. we think the president should have that tool. four year constitutional -- everybody in this room except one person has co-sponsored that. we have 40 co-sponsors and we will push that. that could be part of the solution. on a day we are looking -- pretty good silver. they were looking for that silver bb. >> thank you. senator johnson. >> i really do want to thank you all for your service. i mean that in all sincerity. you do incredibly important work and i appreciate the work and effort you put into your jobs. come from a background having watched the debate over whether you should set up this department. it is a very legitimate debate. i come from a background in manufacturing where you are always looking for continuous

improvement. my questions are from that basis. i don't want anybody taking offense. are we safer? one question i asked is are we as a as we could be based on resources we are putting for the program in the department. first thing i was trying to the term and is how much money is wrapped up in bureaucracy and the overhead of the department of homeland security? look for the 22 agencies that were consolidated. their budget in 2002 was $20 billion is the best i can come up with. now we're spending $56 billion. almost an increase of three times. do you have in your mind or budgeting process how much the department of homeland security bureaucracy versus how much expense based on the mission and

putting real assets in place? >> it is a difficult question to answer because one of the criticisms of the department was it did not have enough administration so things like procurement, acquisition, planning were not adequately performed. that is why senator carter mentioned one of the reasons there was not an audit capability of the department. we are making great progress on that score. you can call that bureaucracy or management. the idea is to have as little management as possible to get the maximum out of a large complicated department. i could go through component by component and say we had 7,000 border patrol agents. now we have 21,000 border patrol agents and there on the field. i can go through and say the tsa

didn't really exist. that almost had to be built from scratch with accompanying personnel training and technology. i would be happy to sit with you and go through that and see where we are. we are trying to keep the administrative arm as thin as possible given what we are asked to managed and how we are asked to manage it. but the goal as i said earlier is to do that with as thin a layer of management as possible to empower those in the field to do their jobs. >> one thing i would appreciate it if you could take a look at the head count of the agencies that we are consolidating as a basis. that i can work up in terms of 230,000 employees in the department. 63 in the tsa. director mueller, we were concerned how many fbi agents

were devoted to the task. i want to ask your opinion. do you have frustrations in terms of the resources that are devoted to your activities versus what resources are spent in the department overhead? >> one of these consultants came in to look at our structure and determine, we are a very flat line structure with 56 field offices that do work around the country and persons from the business community were saying because they report to one individual that you have got a real problem in terms of coverage. they come away and say usa and in terms of management. kerri matrixed organization. you don't go through the hierarchy. if someone is doing counterterrorism all the people back at headquarters, and additionally we have more agents

on the street in various communities doing the investigation. what we find from counterterrorism i cannot assign responsibility for protecting the country to particular office and we have to integrate the information and manage the cases not just domestically but in concert with the cia and others looking at the cases internationally which is -- required us to build up a kid ability and headquarters we did not have before. that is frustrating. everybody in my organization would like to be in the field but in order to be effective we have to build a capability to guana nate our actions. in the cyberarea traditionally crimes have been bank robberies or white-collar crimes in a particular division. you can affect persons in all 50 states. you don't know where they are. in order to address the

cyberintrusions' it takes headquartered oversight working day in and day out with dhs and cia and other departments. given the threat we had to develop new organizational structures to address them. >> in terms of that information, possibly more efficient model utilizing counterterrorism center for the coordination effort. >> counterterrorism is analytical. what we provide is the media response to a lead anywhere in the country. we had threats last week and agents following aspect on that lead in every one of the state's in the country and a combination of the analytical capability along with the ability of the operational ability to pursue that lead, interview people, do wires where appropriate and

court orders to do surveillance around the country and do forensics work which provides the intelligence which is absolutely essential to bring to bear. nctc is not analytical. >> one of the tasks of the department is response to a terrorism attack. you look at the earthquake in d.c. as a dress rehearsal. i wasn't here but i was told cellphone did not work for hours. it was a mess getting out of town. there was not a good evacuation plan. have you looked at that instant and evaluated how prepared the department performed as you would have expected? >> we look at all those instances. when you have a disaster that occurs, of a private cellphone capability is often overwhelmed in the first instance. everyone is trying to call out. a key question i asked was what

about the responders? were they in touch with each other? to have effective interoperable the? as far as i know the answer is yes. the second question is evacuation of the capital region. we had the issue with snow storms, with this recent earthquake, we have been working -- there is a capital region group that involves virginia, maryland and our department, working with the office of personnel management in terms of how do you effect an orderly evacuation of the district? you don't have enough road coverage to do it very well and that is the plain fact but it can be done better and that group is an ongoing session looking at how they can improve evacuation procedures that the federal government instead of going to shut down.

>> senator moran. >> i would like to express my appreciation to our three witnesses for their presence and their efforts to make america more safe and secure. i express gratitude on behalf of everyone in kansas for what you do. let me focus on an issue that has received less attention than what we normally talk about in safety and security. we often talk about transportation at airports and railroads and those kinds of things. there has been a genuine concern that the weapons of mass destruction committee talked about aggro bioscience from animal disease. it give us an f in a report on their preparation for that occurrence. in my view a real threat exists

in our ability to the term, detects, quarantine the introduction of any kind of disease into our food supply. we have a hearing this afternoon on this topic in which one of your officials will testify from your department. i would like to know your perspective ten years later after 9/11. slightly before 9/11 the president of kansas state university testified in front of emerging threat hearing in washington d.c. about this issue. it wasn't something a lot of us thought about. i would like you to bring me up to date in where we are in regard to that threat. >> that threat is one of many e evolving threats we continue to confront. one of the challenges we have been working on these last few years is to improve and replace

our laboratory diagnostic capability because one problem with these threats is diagnostic, it is quarantine. decisions need to be made on a rapid basis. it is one of the forces of our food supply beginning to be infected. we have been working with kansas on the in mev. one of the concerns -- somebody will correct me if i'm wrong, but the department asked for $150 million for f y 12 and the house was 75. the senate mark was zero. i hope that can be explored in the conference between the house and senate, we can rectify that. that facility is, i think, necessary for the next generation not just for now but for the future. we not only to the need to think

about what is happening now but what we need to confront ten years from now. >> edition -- i appreciate your scientific aspect. the where we are better prepared or less prepared for some contaminant. >> i would say overall we are better prepared. it obviously involves more departments than dhs but there's a lot of cross departmental work. unexerciseds have been done. importantly customs and border protection with respect to inspecting what can come into the country has done a lot of work in this arena. >> thank you very much. >> senator mccain. >> i think the witnesses for their service. and director mueller, thank you for your willingness to continue

to serve. madam secretary, are you aware of the report of september 12th from the government accountability office addressed to chairman levin and me on the costs and benefits of an increased department of defense role in helping to secure the southwest land border? >> i am familiar with that particular report. >> i would refer for your -- to you for your reading, in the report it says agency officials identified a number of broader issues and concerns surrounding expansion of dod's assistance in securing southwest u.s. land

border. specifically they include concern about the absence of a suit -- strategy for southwest border security and a resulting challenge to identify and plan dod role. you aware of department of defense concern about the absence of a comprehensive strategy for southwest border security? >> as i said i don't know that report but i will say, i have spoken with secretary gates and pinetta that we do have a comprehensive border strategy, what it is and what will dod can assist us in. >> you disagree with the dot officials about the absence of a comprehensive strategy for southwest border security? >> vehemently. >> i fail to see a strategy yet. residents of my state -- >> i would be happy -- to brief

you over the last few months and to arrive at one but i am more than happy to come in and sit down with you and go through what is happening. >> i would be glad to receive that. we had one meeting which was highly unsatisfactory. you might want to broadcast your strategy to the presidents of the southwest who also served when the governors and senators agree that there is no comprehensive strategy along with dod officials expressing concern. i am sure you are familiar with operation fast and furious. given the high level of information sharing between departments were you made aware of the operation when it was under way? >> no. >> let me be clear for the record. you were unfamili