transfusions. >> so the best minds that we have and doctors that we have in this country, their consensus is that with the best treatment for them? major general, my question to you is can you assure us that the best treatment available in this country will be available to our soldiers in the unfortunate circumstance that any of us contract ebola plaques >> absolutely. as stated earlier, there will be a hospital both in monrovia and senegal where they will be stationed and it's there to exclusively take care of the u.s. military personnel. ..

by sitting next to somebody who is exhibiting symptoms on a bus? >> thank you for your question. first of all for the record i'm not a doctor so i cannot be -- what we learned is that less there's contact with bodily fluid -- >> would that include perspiration? >> that could include perspiration. >> to have to contact the skin?

>> i can't answer that. my understanding is it has to be through a broken skin but i'm not sure about that. >> would you say it's possible even if it's not likely? your protocol you described before say that somebody was classification of low risk is prevented from taking public transportation. so surely you foresee that somebody, maybe not likely but is it possible that somebody could catch the ball on across? >> we haven't experienced that. with ebola could be possible. there's no scientific evidence that proves workers against. >> there's no scientific evidence that could be transmitted through saliva, vomit, perspiration? >> yes. >> doesn't live on surfaces? can it live or more than 50 minutes on a surface? >> i cannot answer that. >> you can't answer? >> i didn't know the answer. >> may be dr. lurie can.

cam ebola survive outside of a patient on in your service or any period of time? >> they can survive on an inert surface for very portrait of time depending on -- >> let me ask you. is it possible, not likely, is a possible civil can't contract ebola sitting next to someone on a bus who has it? can you imagine a way that could happen? is it possible to? >> one would have to have been in contact with body fluids. it does include perspiration. >> major general, get back your soldiers here. you have assured us they been adequately trained in avoiding the contraction of the ebola. if a soldier came to you and said major general, is it possible, not likely, is it possible to contract ebola sitting next to someone on the bus who has it? what would your answer be to them? i trust you will give us a straight answer. >> i would defer to the medical professionals as the doctor just

said. it can be transmitted through sweat, bodily fluids has been noted. and i would say that that is why we have such three suit separation. that's why we don't -- >> fim a soldier and ascii that, what would your answer be? >> my answer would be, it's a hypothetical. >> it could certainly have been -- >> they could possibly happen. >> i'm asking you to answer hypothetical. >> you are asking me to answer hypothetical so it could possibly happen but i would defer and say in all likelihood and need to follow the procedures you were taught. >> i'm hoping they're getting the best training possible and i'm concerned if they're being told they can't catch it on a bus. can you tell me which answer to the soldier would be if he said, can i contract -- >> for the record they're not getting on buses with liberian

citizens. they are in senegal, but -- >> we have other members from kentucky serving in the military. >> fort campbell folks will be there, absolutely. they won't be getting on buses with liberian personnel either come and so i would tell them to go in and follow the protocols. >> just quickly. our confidence has been shaken in the cdc because we get to the king answered. when it first with milton was going overseas to combat ebola i was skeptical but then on second thought i said that's where our competency in the government resides, or the confidence resides in the american public is with our military and their ability to focus on a mission. today you've and to the question for you refer to cdc guidance whether they should be courting for 10 days in country or 21 days in country. what i'm asking you for the safety of the soldiers and for the safety of the public is to use your own judgment. we trust the military actually

more than the cdc on this. so please, use that to guide you. >> absolutely and that's why i reiterate, once they returned we are having, not the self-monitoring but cdc standards because we're the military, having those individuals monitored by their units once they are back. >> if the public would like to see them stay on the base for the 21 days after they are back -- >> i understand their concern, but come and again, this is, we think it's prudent to have them checked twice a day on base but be able to return to their loved ones. >> we appreciate that you mentioned is the noise has been to protect this country and we appreciate your service. >> i thank the gentleman. now the gentlelady from new mexico. >> thank you, mr. chairman. with the arrival of ebola in the

united states we are all in this committee really concerned about whether or not our emergency preparedness systems are effective and whether our public health system is an effective response mechanism. i think i share with everyone in this committee that we are concerned that we've seen protocols have to be adjusted, that we wish we had better training, that we are concerned about hospital responses. i would just add particularly after the last statements, and i don't disagree that we want the highest standard of response, but a multitude of responses that are not based on scientific evidence and that best practices if they are not, the art sound, then we create even more confusion and more panic by individuals, and we can't really manage public health court and emergency systems response. those are clear lessons that are learned as secretary of health

dealing with, i wasn't there to deal with virus in mexico but we had those experts surely there but i was there for sars, for potential pandemic and for not having enough flu vaccine. i am still there do with one of the worst hepatitis c issues in the united states. unfortunately, in new mexico we not important it is to have a good, solid, strong public health and emergency response system. to that and i know we have been both critical and we recognized whether or not congress invests sufficient resources in the cdc, and the nih on oliver of the partners that have a response to emergency preparedness, we expect that there is still in place a robust response. but i want to be clear that had the fact that these policymakers have failed congress to invest

abruptly and have cut funding, have that had a negative impact on our ability to respond, not only to ebola that all public health crises? >> know. i think we have seen an erosion in support for public health, several times in her country, and each time that happens we'll look back through the retrospective scope and wish we had done something different. >> i'm not sure understand your answer to get a think having reduced resources targeted at these issues has had any negative impact? >> so, we actually just had the opportunity -- >> because i will tell you that my public health team will say this. my hospital association ys it is. individual hospitals around the country say it is. and the fact that you the decentralized public health system, so even if you had the authority to mandate you don't have a system that you demanded. i don't know that i agree, although i really respect my

colleague, mr. connolly, that you want to mandate here but we have enough issue in this country which is we do not have a centralized public health system. your ability to manage state by state by state by state, and i have a poor state with a centralized system fairly effective, but i can tell you even there it was hard for us to manage all of our county emergency response partners in a crisis. >> you are actually correct, and certainly we are hearing a lot from states. they are very concerned about the reductions and support for public health, and for public health preparedness. and many of them are really looking hard at how they're going to have to cope with the latest rounds of reduction. >> are you prepared now to really think about best practices and more centralized approaches and requiring maybe a different protocol for our

public health emergency response systems in this country? i think if we did that even when congress doesn't do its job to adequately fund these public health issue so that we only read when there's a crisis instead of, and i appreciate someone talk about precautionary principles that we out to be proactive and in as many cases as we can with the evidence is found about being proactive in that particular manner. but, in fact, i do expect that the federal government even with limited resources does everything it can to identify what is best practices are anti-regularly identify what the risks are if you don't adequately fund and what the impact is two states also find themselves without adequate resources to prepare and be trained to effectively. >> i so much appreciate your passion for public health and for the resourcing of public health. it's so important. the way public health is organized in this country by law is the federal government by and

large can provide guidance and tools and best practices by the implementation of other aspects of public health is either out of state or local level. as i think you know well, it's organized differently in different states. >> that's my point. is it may be time to think about whether or not that in of itself is an effective strategy in this country. >> i think it's a very interesting idea. >> i yield back. >> thanks it gently. i ask unanimous consent that page 172 of the report entitled funding of the hhs secretary for prepared is in response in millions of dollars be place in the record. additionally, ask without objection. additionally i ask "the wall street journal" article in the opinion section entitled there's plenty of money to fight ebola be place in the record. without objection. lastly i would ask that the fy

2014 hhs appropriations overview by crs be placed in the record at this time. without objection, so ordered. we now go to the gentleman from michigan. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. and thank all of you for coming today and testifying before this committee on a very important subject, a great deal, a great deal of importance to the people in my district. mr. rauf, quick question. what is the federal government's present witnesses to address to have a pandemic or other emergency whether it's a surgeon michael needs in a specific region? >> i can only speak to the dhs component which is what we studied. >> are you familiar with, do you have any idea how many mobile hospitals are in inventory to be deployed at, welcome reasonable

amount of time meaning one day to three days to revision that is experiencing a surgeon medical needs? that's for any reason whatsoever. another katrina, hazmat emergency, pandemic, earthquake, tornado. >> we did not look at that in the audit. >> in 14 months been in office, since i've been in office the last 14 months, my office has been investigating that need. so first responsibility is to protect this country. and i haven't found any in the inventory. so there's no mobile hospitals available, no mobile isolation units deployable that can be deployed within hours or days of an emergency. ms. burger, either question. your interest. how long have you been a nurse at? >> forty-three years. >> my wife has been a nurse or 37 years, so thank you very much for your service. now i have a question. when a person has any type of

infection disease, whether it's ebola or the flu, i know they are transmitted differently, but for each step that an infected person makes, does it or doesn't not increase the risk of its spreading, potentially? >> i just -- >> give you an example. if somebody came down with the flu, it's quite possible, well, if they stay in the home the only people that are probably going to get sick or infected from the flu is those people that are in the home. that if any member of the household leaves the house, goes to the drugstore, does to the supermarket, whatever the case may be, does the potential to infect others increase? >> well, if it's of the flu, as you know -- >> airborne. >> and they also have good hand washing. so if you are not in direct

contact with the airborne virus going into your eyes by yourself putting her hands into your eyes or something, that's not likely. but what we are talking about here today is the ebola preparedness in this country. >> i understand. >> and it's completed different in this country because there's about 5000 hospitals in this country and 5000 ways to manage this disease. >> how many of those hospitals haven't isolation unit that is capable of containing the ebola virus speak what's according to what the hospitals report on a daily basis in the newspapers, that there already and they can isolate patients at a moments notice. but what which is cub reporter to us yesterday was a nurse that's not, from kansas city who has a quote negative pressure rooms which was not operable. >> okay.

that's one negative pressure rooms. very important, special with ebola, correct, to have that capability? >> correct. >> if a patient walks in with flulike symptoms, first thing they would do in a good hospital is they will visit an administrative clerk does triage, ask interest questions, is that not correct? >> if they have the flu, most of the time they are at home in b bed. >> well, that's not always the case. they could be experiencing fever your they do come to the emergency room's. >> if they are seriously ill. >> seriously ill with flulike symptoms. so is it possible, what is the protection that the an administrative clerk that meet you at the hospital, the receptionist that asks what are your symptoms, why are you here, what's your insurance? what's the chances of them being infected by an ebola virus? >> the gentleman's time has

expired. , but she can answer but i just, you're not talking con your same flulike symptoms bu but you are assuming the person has ebola? >> correct. >> the lady can certainly answ answer. >> again, as i say several, 5000 hospitals all have different protocols on how they handle ebola. some cpd officers are not asked to step in. they are given little ebola gets that have a gallon, some gloves and a surgical mask. -- a gallon. down. i think that's a we are talking about is that everybody, everybody needs to be trained and prepared and educated on how to handle a potential ebola patient so that the clerk is also not exposed to unnecessary virus from ebola. >> thank you very much. >> we now go to the other gentleman from michigan.

>> thank you, mr. chairman. and thank you to this medal for being here today. earlier this month several airlines including kenya airways, british airways, and nigeria's air suspended flights to and from certain affected countries in west africa. our own state department issued travel warnings to our citizens urging them to delay nonessential travel to liberia and sierra leone. and recent reports suggest that more than two dozen countries have restricted entrance to persons of traveled west africa. my question is to dr. lurie. under what circumstances, if any, do you think a travel ban or increased top -- travel research would be safeguard to protect american? >> so i thank you for that question. over the past week we have increased and tightened up our screening measures for individuals traveling from the three affected countries.

they are all now being funneled through five major airports. they get screened before they leave. they get screened when they come. every passenger coming from an affected country now has the information given to the state and local health authorities, and they will be actively monitored for 21 days. so we've really tightened up quite a bit and i believe it should be sufficient. >> how about a travel ban? is there any circumstance would you support a travel been? >> we think a trouble been would be incredibly unproductive or counterproductive. >> in what ways? >> well, first of all right now we have a really good mechanism to identify and track every single person coming up from infected country. if you're to put a travel ban and the fact you will have people coming to visit this country who we wouldn't know. we wouldn't even know how to find and/or monitor them.

that would become a serious problem. >> but if someone is why commercial and they don't exhibit symptoms, they been in the region that's infected, how are you going to know that they are infected? or that they might have been infected? >> i think the whole point of doing the exit screening and then the screaming when they come to the united states, and then following them for 21 days, taking their temperatures, twice a day is exactly so we can see them through the end of the incubation period. and if necessary be on top of that within hours of in exhibiting a fever. >> mr. torbay, same question. which is what a travel ban under any circumstances? >> no, we don't. a travel ban, first of all, we have to recognize that there are no direct flights from those three west african country studios. the majority of people actually prime minister through europe. so travel ban will have flights coming from europe, which i

don't think it would be feasible. but even with that we can't because if we're talking about fighting ebola at its source, we need health professionals to be able to travel in and out of the country. we need supplies enable to be flown into, into the country in order -- >> to the predominantly travel through commercial airline? >> absolutely. >> would be prohibitive to require that travel through charter jets and? >> it will be very expensive. >> the question, follow-up question. you said earlier, and the doctor said if there's a symptoms, there's no risk to other people. what if someone were to get onto an airplane with no symptoms but you have an eight hour flight, united states from european country, let's say, and did in west africa, europe to the united states, could exhibit symptoms on the flight? isn't that a risk? >> i very much appreciate your

question and concern, and i think that is exactly why now all of the planes are being routed through the fighter planes to the airport. why, by the time the plane lands on the ground both customs and border patrol and the cdc quarantine officer notified about whether there are any six passengers on the planes. when they get off the point that as the the same questions again and given information about symptoms of ebola and what to do if they have any. >> i'm going to yield my remains into the gentlemen from florida, mr. mica. >> thank you. first of all, what you've got in place has failed. the doctor, "the new yorker" doctor just came through and he got the temperature thing and all of that, but it failed. he self-reported. i think it's basically what you have is a 21 day period from where they have been subject to the infection, and people need

to be quarantined coming out of those countries. you don't need a travel ban. you need to go to the people who post the risk. i understand it's only 80-150 coming out of those countries right now entering the united states a week, is that right? that's what i'm told. but you quarantined them. my grandparents when they came in the ellis island were subject working. we quarantined lots of people. i will take you out to where we did. or the self quarantine themselves. they pose a risk, every traveler doesn't. but people need to be identified. we just came to the airport today at dulles, and again can we didn't come from one of those countries but we didn't have to. someone -- you just a transited. they can prime minister -- >> the gentleman to yield its time is expired if you could wrap up. >> again, just commonsens commot doesn't prevail a brand-new or anywhere. 21 days. look at this guy again, learned by his example. the 14th he flew out, the

12th was his last day there. you count 21 days forward. so he should've been subject to quarantines not exposing itself on the subway and other places. your guidance finally -- >> i'm going -- >> but i didn't -- >> i will come back. >> let me just finish because -- >> the gentlemen will have additional minute. >> just an additional minute. i don't know if this is true, it's new york. workers and i spread this stuff. and nurses were either taken ore things off our exposure of the skin. we don't know. do you know? no. we don't know. here's the picture i saw. my wife told me about this. these are new york police first responders. the you have a memo to first responders and how to do with this stuff? >> we do. we put up guidance to -- >> this is a press account. i don't know if it's true but it shows in putting their gloves and other stuff from the area in new york into a public trash

been. so again, what you've got to do, make certain first responders, nurses, all the protected things in place where we have exposure, and we have exposure and the testing at the airport is not working. we need a quarantines in place, period, for those coming out of their, or you're not going to stop this to the doctor was a very responsible, educated individual. thank you. >> i thank the gentleman. i ask unanimous consent the ranking member have one minute. without objection. >> esther corbett, the quarantined, can you talk about that? i know your interest in what's happening in africa but your interest in what's happening here. can you comment on that? >> as i mentioned one of the main things are fighting people in west of kosovo ability to take steps to bring the backhoe. we cannot recruit from use or anywhere else in the world if there's a chance they might not be able to come back home to the

families and to the duties, to their other duties. putting people in quarantine actually goes against our ability to recruit and to retain and, therefore, it would go against our ability to fight ebola in west africa. >> now the children from florida for five minutes. >> thank you, mr. chairman. dr. lurie, as i understand, congress in 2006 passed a pandemic all hazards preparedness act. we review that and reauthorized in this congress, and one of the key points in that was establishing an assistant secretary for preparedness and response, which is of course you, and this is supposed to be the focal point for these responses. you were quoted previously sang you have responsibly forgetting the nation prepared for public health emergencies, whether naturally occurring disasters or man-made, as well as for helping to respond and recover, a pretty significant undertaking come into quote. it occurs to me i'm glad to see

you here but i have not seen you out front. i know too many occasions is supposed to be part of what you do. have you been appearing at public meetings over the last several weeks in conjunction with ebola? have you been participating in any briefings for the public? >> let me start by saying, and repeating something i said in my testimony, back in the spring when we first learned about ebola in west africa, our whole office activated to start taking action on behalf of the country, on behalf of west african -- >> i appreciate that but can you speak census has become heightened with the american people in the last three or four weeks? it seems like your protocols been a lot northern summit of the folks even though your office is a key one, so how would you respond to that? >> one of the things we know budget with public health emergencies is the public does better if there is one or two consistent spokespeople. dr. frieden has played a major role in that because the cdc has

the lead for the public health aspects of the response. what i can tell you -- >> i appreciate that. let me ask you this. the president had what was billed in the press as emergency bogeys at the white house. one last friday and then a week ago tomorrow on saturday after agassi played a round of golf. did you attend either of those meetings? >> our second to attend this meeting and i've met with her every single day since we got involved in this response. >> did you attend a? >> no, i did not. >> and so has the white house or the secretary of hhs instructed your office to stand out as being the point office in favor of this new ebola's are? >> not at all. >> so here's an issue. thomas eric duncan brought people to the u.s. your office excluded what was envisioned in this legislation, did he was able to bring it is easier.

so what we do, where you guys prepared in your office for thomas duncan, or did you drop the ball and could you've done some things that are? >> so what happened with mr. duncan required a whole system to work, right? it required the federal components to be in place. it required state and local health departments to be in place but it required hospitals to be in place and it required individual health providers, doctors or nurses all to be able to do the job. certainly there were some breakdowns in links in the chain. do i think that we've done a good job preparing hospitals and health care system in our country for disasters? yes, i do. do i think we are being very aggressive now about preparing health professionals and health care providers and institutions to be able to recognize, treat and isolate patients with ebola? i think we're being very, very aggressive about that.

>> explained to me than, the pandemic act seemed to have your office a point person. now we have this ebola czar. how did the chain of command work in terms of how we are confronting ebola at this stage? is the hhs as they come in several reporting iran and is direct reporting to the president? what is your understanding of this? >> his role and responsibility is to coordinate all the different aspects so that we are increasingly working in a whole of government response. it to make sure that all the parties are working together on a day-to-day basis to make -- >> isn't that in your job description anyway? aren't you kind of a czar to do with these pandemics? >> so i have responsibility for data with medical and public health emergency, particularly domestically, and the other thing i think it's important recognize is the bulk of this

response is global health response, not a domestic response. my office has been active along with the cdc, the nih, fda in being with the secretary at the beginning of this as i said almost everyday. >> i know the chairmen invited ron klain you. i wish he would've comes we could ask some people as mr. gowdy put out may have some reason to question whether this is the right individual to actually execute the medical component of this or whether this is more for political reasons. i would've liked to been able to ask them some questions to try to prove that further. speed would the gentleman yield? >> yes. >> for the record we get invited. we hope you would be but we also invited the world health organization representative and as you know we find about half of their entire budget and their answer to us was that basically they don't do congressional hearings. so i'm sending a letter to the appropriators letting them know

they don't do congressional hearings about how there's been a our money and other going to fight something like this. but it is in the concert as you say. you've got an attorney who has been hired to do this as a czar and you have the world health organization and neither one in a. i yield back spent we now go to the gentleman from georgia for five minutes. mr. collins. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate you each being here. there's a lot that concerns me from the searing. i came into this hearing hoping in some ways got some assurance but also i'm very concerned that some the answers that were given. i make it to the demo by want to focus on being from georgia i want to focus on a positive note. i want to focus on something, because back, when they're brought united states, came to really the constituent to my constituent started feeling they are, this is something we don't understand and how you get it. been in the weeks and days after

that the conflicting and i could public statements that followed the arrival from cdc, others. have caused even more. in fact, today in one of mine local press outlets there is basically an opinion poll, people can click its of 75% believe the cdc's information from the beginning was just an actor and not helpful. you have a level of trust that is gone with many people. but what happened was really time to switch gears and say frankly from my perspective georgia got it right. emory got a right to nebraska has got right to the are some places that have got a ride to ottawa to know is we continue this process, look at the precautions, the things going on, focus on the protocols for ms. burger and the nurses and the folks are coming to the very front stages, they do it in a way that they follow protocol, they have the protocols in place and have the equipment in place. this is what i want to commend

in the reagan diversity in atlanta for being able to be the first hospital to successfully treat ebola. the fourth is still recovering at emory and is declared ebola free. emory do this because they're set up with the cdc on those levels that we've heard about, dr. lurie come on the table topic they work with the cdc. they're one of those outlets in case something happened which, most of which i am so proud of, except so the public statements by the director who is really lost confidence of many in the field and many in the country by the statements are made and actions he took for him to be the face is really a concern. of this. so the question that i have is a looking at this, emory has put out a lot of great stuff. i would like to add the editorial from the president and chief executive officer of emory health care. >> without objection the entire article would be placed in the record. >> i do appreciate that because i think this is a national

response. you said something a moment ago, you said you're looking for this is not a domestic, a global issue. art with part of global? so what part would you be missing and understanding of how that would affect us? when you're me concern was if it was something overseas when we have places like emory and nebraska doing it right, doing the protocols that were not forced upon them, they had a ready to go. was it, should it not a been a part of your job? >> may be used as to what i was trying to convey, what i was trying to convey is -- >> very quickly and lightly. >> i have domestic responsibility for preparedness. in fact, one of the things that i was reflecting on when i was listening to comments is that prior to taking this job i had an opportunity to go around to every county in georgia and do those tabletop exercises. for bio preparedness. i spoke to the leadership at emory yesterday and we're very

grateful for their incredible response in their leadership, not only taking care patients at emory but now helping us at helping the rest of the country as we build out and develop a regional strategy for taking care of -- >> i appreciate -- because i do want to at least extend with the positive health care workers are getting it right but i share ms. burger's concerns and there was discussions lately is let's say they did switch planes. there's not tracking the they don't fly into one of the five airports. they present at an emergency room which by the way in my area a lot of times for areas they do go to the emergency room with flulike symptoms all of the time. all the time. part of the problem we've got it is going to get worse. so it is the people, having trained, have adequately prepared and i think this is the part that concerns me. you made this statement is going to india because the concern out there is for the people to understand what is done right,

emory hospital, nebraska those kind of things that are done what it took to follow protocols and be prepared. that's number one. from the cdc level and the spokesman level there's been a disastrous failure of that. there's been now with mr. klain a disastrous. not just an image system that we needed someone else that has the credentials that you have for others. and here's my problem. after we discussed everything on when it actually got it, a doctor in new york, which i was in new york, just get back next -- just came back last night. here's your response. it's the response that the american people cannot hear anymore, and that is after it happened, out have an abundance of caution we cleaned the bowling alley to out of an abundance of caution we went back to the american people need to see the abundance of caution before him. that is your job. that is the job of the cdc and the chopper preparedness.

they wanted to see the abundance of caution before our health care workers were put at risk, before system -- that's what abundance of coalition you to come, and for that from a very positive statement from emory hospital and nebraska and others who didn't right there i want to highlight an abundance of caution should have started a while back, not after the fact to with that i yield back. >> we now go to the gentleman from florida, mr. mica. >> a perfect lead-in. you told us you responsible for both domestic prepared his and the global response. >> no. my responsibility is a domestic responsibility primarily. >> so you have nothing to do with a global response. more from this article about w.h.o. and wouldn't come here today. first of all this is the worst ebola outbreak in history, is that right? okay. and asses he says the world heah organization said today it would probe complaints it had been too slow to wake up to scale of

ebola. and this has critics have questioned why don't you w.h.o. will be declared an international health emergency in august, eight months after the epidemic began. did the administration or anyone in a position of authority from the united states where we spend millions of dollars in w.h.o. asked them to proceed? >> so let me -- >> no. >> let me put a finer points because you do you know if they did? you can say you don't know. >> i don't know if they did what? >> anything. did we go after w.h.o.? this is a global -- >> we have been working with w.h.o. -- >> where -- and this isn't my stuff. i'm just reading you what i'm telling you that people are coming after. okay. this isn't a panic. is to be prepared. are you in charge of being prepared? >> i am in charge of being prepared. >> okay then i think you need to

turn your resignation in. have you read this report? have you read this report about preparedness that the ig -- d. have some authority over preparedness at dhs because i have no authority over -- >> in utah the authority to do the job. who has the authority to do the job of? just prepared for this committee. the day is known for. he said the stuff they bought nobody, even the inventory where it's gone, you've got come you got equipment to protect people that's out of date. and while protecting the they even put a hand sanitizers a look at 84% of them are expired. is that your job or somebody else? >> without -- >> iif it isn't your job, isn't the new sars job? whose job is to to protect the american people? >> first let me clarify that dhs has responsibly to by personal protective equipment for -- >> have you been over there to see what they have? >> and -- >> have you been over there to see what they're doing?

have you seen this report? staff, make sure she gets a copy of this report. this is a scathing report, page after page. the inventory outdated, stuff we thought we spend millions of dollars and we aren't prepared. let me ask you another question. having been a while i was through the blued -- the bird flu. this is transmitted by an individual. take and continues comforts while you should aren't in the health care workers. you are wrong, mr. torbay. they are the most exposed to this. so anyone has been exposed for 21 days coming into the united states must be quarantined. i don't care if it's in continues. they should recognize their own risk, and we should watch those people. you had one guy come in yesterday. they got to what come his 18th day or something, came down with it. okay? so i think, and it may not be that many health care workers but they are the most exposed unless you're burying the people like you just saw with a photo from him.

if you're burying people are in the medical, you quarantined those people for the own risk. even if we pay for it to keep this thing from spreading. right now we are lucky. we don't know what infected the nurses. we don't know, again, if there will be other cases. you have to take steps in an emergency situation like this. she claims she doesn't have the authority to see what dhs have to keep us prepared. somebody needs to see that we are prepared. again this isn't panic. spent last question. >> bird flu. i was involved with bird flu. these people are coming by plane. when some plane comes in from africa or prime minister, passengers from there, what are we doing with it? the plane. >> with the plane itself speak with yes. they might be screening. there may be vomit. there may be body fluid. we don't know if those nurses

guided from taking off equipment incorrectly or for touched their skin. you testified earlier perspiration would do it spent there are protocols -- >> i want to know the protocols in place but i've seen the equipment that we have answers for disease control actually got, and we could bring up a heating device that heats the plane to 140 degrees to kill the germs and that's what we used in the bird flu. we doing anything like that to make sure those planes aren't little ebola transporters? >> you sound upset advance our -- >> i'm not upset. i'm happy. >> will make sure you get the protocols. >> i'm not happy with, again can you tell me me you are responsible for preparedness. if that's not your responsibility, isn't the new guy? does have the ability to go in and make certain that we are prepared? what you want to do is be

prepared to the boy scouts marching song, be prepared. we spend millions of dollars, and inspector general of the united states has gone at our request and look at when agency is doing to be prepared and it's a scathing report we are not prepared. so you go back to the other guy who didn't show up today, the new czar. we want to work with you. you. we wanted working people at risk. we've already been through this as i said with bird flu. are those planes being properly sterilized? this can spread, okay? it hasn't spread. we aren't at risk right now, then the protocols, you get to the committee and give to the record -- >> the gentleman's time has expired. >> the first responders direction. i will put these pictures of the videos from new york disposing of the clubs and the masked -- >> without objection. >> would be happy to get you those protocols and protocol for cleaning the plane and a very much looking forward to working with you and other members of congress as we move forward with

this. >> thank you. i'm not going spee space i havea plane to catch. >> thank you, have a safe flight. about your 12th in four days. >> i do want to ask just one question then we'll go to mr. cummings for his clothes. there was a statement made to seeseems like an eternity ago bt maybe 15 minutes ago about following people for 21 days after they land. dr. lurie, currently in there is no visa restriction or law that gives you specific authority. do you believe you have the authority under existing public health laws to force follow-up daily, temperature checks and the like? let's assume for a moment we take the gentleman from florida's analysis that a plane

comes in, a person tests unless you said elevated temperature for a moment, whether they test positive later or not. for othefor the other people one plane, do you have the authority then to compel them to be tested, or is it just hope for the best that they were recognized high temperature and report? >> i believe that we have the authorities at wendy's but we are constantly looking at in updating our policies based on the situation at the time, and she would continue to look and make sure we have the authorities that we need. >> in addition to asking for those protocols which of our city went to give us, i'm going to direct committee to, in fact, ask questions of you and other areas and, of course, our new czar asked a specific authorities that would support regarding people. there's been a lot of discussion about restrictions on people's travel, and i agree quite

frankly many of the people here that it sounds like a great idea, it's a great sound bite but then when you actually try to figure out what stop somebody from leaving sierra leone going to paris, spending a day there, then booking a flight here, the practical reality is it would be circumvented to come over the question of a plane load of people coming in, and i came in today into washington, d.c. your guy came in with a marine major. a marine major who has a cold and to as many of the symptoms come and she did not go through a check. they're not doing temperatures are if he later reports, the whole question from a public health standpoint of are we prepared to locate and to mandate surveillance on people so that after the fact we can actually do a containment is one that i'm directing that went as cases of questions, and doctor,

your organs it would be a part of it. >> would you give me a moment sent you talked about the guy with the cold to do a quick educational sound bite? >> this will be your closing statement, doctor. >> anybody who has a fever or flulike symptoms during this season out to be asked to provide a travel history to look at whether they've been out of the united states in the past 21 days and whether they have been in one of the infected countries. >> i couldn't agree with you more. if i get a fever, having been in iraq, kuwait, saudi arabia, uae and, well, additional places meeting with people, many of whom have traveled to africa recently, i will be the first to rush to the hospital to report. with that we go to the gentleman from maryland. >> thank you very much mr. chevy. first of all of what you think all our witnesses for being here today. i must tell you that i can understand the emotion of the

american people. when there is an issue of life and death, and when you have people who put their lives on the line to take care of the sick, not knowing whether they will become sick themselves, that's serious business. when you have our military going across the sea to try to make a difference, as i always say, change trajectory of somebody's destiny, and the idea that they may come back with a disease that could possibly kill them, that's serious business. so, you know, as i listen to you, mr. lumpkin and you, major general, i have absolute the no

doubt that you will do everything in your power to protect our military. i have no doubt about that. and i think that if you find that as you go through the procedures that you have in place if you feel those procedures need to be changed or either tweaked so as you might be more effective and efficient in that goal, you will do that, is that correct? >> that is correct. >> and you, doctor laura, i want to thank you for what you are doing. and one of the things i just -- dr. lurie. when i looked at all of dr. lurie, and i saw all those health workers, nurses i guess it was, and then i see ms. burger sitting next to you, and then i hear about people not

being properly trained in the hospital to i think would be almost legislative malpractice for me to not ask the question, enemy been asked before when i was out of the room, how we make sure that those folks receive the training. they are not just running around saying, you know, i'm just complaining to be complaining. they want to be the best. they don't mind, they don't mind putting their lives in danger. but they want to know that everything possible to make sure that they are safe, they want to make sure those things are in place. and i am so glad that nurses i am has been found to be able to free now. but how do we make sure that they know that. and ms. burger talked about an executive order in the nature was asking you about, dr. lurie,

whether you had all the things you need them to do what you need to do. i just got to ask you, when you listen to ms. burger, and ms. burger i watched you on television, i know your passion. no, i'm serious. i feel that. it's contagious. and it is strong, and i know you care about the people that you represent, no doubt about it. so how do we do that? i mean, dr. lurie, help me. >> sure. first let me say, ms. burger and i and probably every nurse in america share the same goal, to keep them safe, to be sure that they are trained, to be sure that if there front-line providers that they have the education, the knowledge, the adequate training and exercises to stay safe. so i can tell you a little bit about what we've been doing.

we have been reaching through the top. we've got a very comprehensive now national education program going on. we reach for the top for all the hospital to all the hospitals for the nursing associations. i was on the phone with 10,000 nurses the other night and they were more that wanted to get on the phones. we have said to them all, please, if you're a hospital, conduct a medical and a nursing grand round. to first patient training. to first patient drills and exercises. make sure your nurses are trained and to front-line nurses have to practice putting on ppe to proficiency. okay, have policies, plans and protocols in place and drill and exercises. we have said to the nurses and other public health professionals, here is the guidance. please be sure that the check was in of the things are posted in your places of front-line care. please ask your hospitals and your administrators to be sure that there are plans, practices

and policies in place, and that you have the pte required to do your job. we sent to state and local health departments, we would like you to call every hospital in your jurisdiction, find out if they put those plans in place. find out if those exercises are in place. find out if the pte is in place and report back to us. and we will continue to to be reaching out with material, with training come with education opportunities until we've got this done. >> ms. burger, this is your moment. this is your moment. dr. lurie just talked about, i hope you don't mind, this is important. dr. lurie just talked about what they going to do, what they are doing. those ladies that were behind you today, i'm income they want to know. some of them have left now, but they want to know that they're going to be protected. now, you just heard what she said. maybe you want to give her some

advice as to what you all -- and i'm not trying to be smart. i'm serious. this is a critical moment. go ahead. >> and nurses that were here had legislative visits. they are fully engaged in this hearing and they appreciate the opportunity to be year. but, and what i would like to say is that until the cdc guidelines and training and education and personal protective gear at an optimal level are mandatory, no matter how good the guidelines are, no matter how good the intentions are, we need to ask congress to step up and do what's right for the united states of america and its citizens by making sure that front-line caregivers have mandatory optimal standards for protective gear, and training and education. >> so there is a gap, dr. lurie, am i right?

basically what she just said, in other words, you may be saying all these things but then it's a whole other thing for the hospital, hospitals to provide the things that you tell them they need to go and get. am i right? >> i think ms. burger and i share the same goal, and i share the same goal, as i said, with most nurses and nursing workstations around the country, and look forward to working with the moving forward so that we can be sure that nurses across this country to pu who put thems on the line of fire every single day with other front-line health care providers are safe. >> as i close i just want to thank you, mr. torbay, for your testimony. and i want to say, it goes back, we have to address the issues in america. no doubt about it. but we also to go back to the source. we've got to do that. and i think, mr. torbay, your testimony about some basic things that are needed, such as food vehicles, fuel, staff, supplies, resources, things that

can be, that will allow us to try to stop this in africa so that it does the continue to come to our shores is so very, very important. and i just hope that, that the congress is listening to you. and i realize that we need more international partners but i think that's what you just told us. people coming in and helping this, because this does not just affect africa or the united states. in fact, it affects the world. and so i don't know how we convince folks, that is, other countries, to do more, to get up to the $988 million figure, but we got to figure out a way to do that. would you agree? and then i will close. >> absolutely. i fully agree with you. i think the whole world needs to realize that we're all in this fight together. and the resources need to be

available until we get this virus under control. and at the same time i'd like to thank the committee for its leadership on this issue, as well as the u.s. government and its agencies for taking the lead in responding to the ebola crisis. they have been doing tremendous job and we are very proud to be part of it. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. want to thank all of our witnesses here today. in closing, i'm going to make a comparison and i think it's an important comparison for the american people, put it in perspective. as was alluded to earlier i just came back from what has become a theater of operation in iraq where isis now, like an ugly, resilient virus or infection has shown up again. islamic terrorism is murdering people far away. while i was there there was a

murder in canada, and around the globe, small but significant events occur in which we realize that terrorism does not stay in the country that we think it begins in or is predominately an. in the war on terror, we rely on the department of defense and our u.s. military as our primary way to eliminate those actors in faraway places like iraq, afghanistan and syria. ..

it's only good if everyone takes it. the idea that we are going to find a shot in a continent of a billion people living in mostly poverty means that even when we find it it may in fact be there for generations. and like smallpox, tuberculosis and others, they never seem to be completely gone. our effort and the effort that all of you articulated a very

well today has to be first of all in africa at the source. the world health organization's coming usaid and once again the united states military have and are taking up the fight against this threat of disease. mr. roth, your testimony and the testimony that we will have following best that the department of homeland security has an obligation, unique obligation one in which they were formed to deal with are things that threaten the home front, ebola and particularly of the movement of the movement of people that may be infected .-full-stop where lee within their jurisdiction and they seem to have not been prepared. so as we conclude here today it is my view that we will be doing both public and nonpublic investigation in the weeks and months to follow. looking for transparency, and

doctor lurie you said this very well transition to the american people. what we tell nurses and doctors and healthcare professionals we need to tell the public because unlike some things where the first responder is in fact the greatest threat the first responder with ebola is not the first to come into contact with the infected individual. almost in every case there will be a cab driver or bus driver, family, friends and others who will already have had unprotected contact by the time he first responder is aware that there may be a problem. by the time that persons who thought that he or she already will in fact be exposed. so as we begin looking at the protocols, i think we have to understand one thing. there is no perfect solution. there is no way that every american is good to place

themselves in a hazmat suit from morning until night to deal with this disease we will have to go to its source and work together with our partners around the world to eradicate it in africa because ultimately like terrorism has been to the american people for more than a decade this disease will not be eradicated if we wait until it comes to our shore. so i think you and i believe this was a worthwhile hearing and i think mr. cummings and the tremendous turnout of members that came back on the up their elections for this hearing and with that, we stand adjourned.

[inaudible conversations] with blink in abul conversations [inaudible conversations]

[inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations]

>> some of the reaction to today's oversight hearing which by the way you will see a good chunk of it this afternoon over on c-span. check c-span.org for schedule information. just an update on the situation the latest dish and in new york, craig spencer of the doctor that worked with doctors without borders from a news conference today says his condition is stable and he's talking. meanwhile back in washington at bethesda maryland the nurse that caught caught ebola while caring for the patient in texas, nina pham has been released. she said she felt fortunate and blessed to be standing here today and at this hour she is meeting with president obama at the white house. just a short while ago before that meeting at the white house, she and the anthony fauci spoke

to reporters and here's what that looked like. >> i will answer a few questions and then we will get her back home to texas to resume a normal, healthy and happy life. [applause] >> good afternoon. i feel fortunate and blessed to be standing here today. i went first and foremost like to thank god, my family and friends. throughout this ordeal i've put my trust in god and my medical team. i'm on my way back to recovery even as i reflect on how many others have not been so fortunate. of course i am so thankful for everyone involved in my care from the moment i became ill and was admitted to the hospital in

dallas as of today my discharge from the research center of nih. i'd especially like to thank doctor kent brantly for donating plasma to me. as a nurse i have a special appreciation for the care that i've received from so many people. not just doctors and nurses but the entire support team. i believe in the power of prayer because i know so many people all over the world have been praying for me. i do not know how i can never thank you enough for your prayers and expressions of concern, hope and love. i join you now for the recovery of others including my colleague and friend, amber vinson and doctor craig spencer. i hope that people understand this illness into this whole experience has been very challenging and stressful for myself and my family. although i no longer have ebola

i know it may be a while before i have my strength back. so with gratitude and respect for everyone's concern i ask for my privacy and for my family's privacy to be respected as we try to get back to a normal life and reunite with my dog. [laughter] thank you everyone. [applause] before i open up for questions i want to recognize two people who really helped us getting to know her as a member of our family here and that is her mother, diana and her sister kathy. [applause] okay. so, questions.

>> what did you do for her while she was here? we know she is free from virus because we have five consecutive negatives. i don't want anyone to take from that that that is the norm and the standard that you can only guarantee someone is virus free if you did five. we did five because this is a research institution, but that isn't the norm. we provided her with supportive care and that's something that i've been saying all along that one of the most important things in bringing back a ebola patients to health is to give them the support to allow their own body to be able to fight off the virus and essentially get rid of the virus. >> [inaudible] >> i would leave that up to her to answer but that isn't up to me right now.

should americans were others [inaudible] >> that is something right now that is under active discussion and you will hear shortly about what the guidelines will be that i want to point out that to remember that it isn't just the cdc and the federal government,, the states have an awful lot to say about what happens but you will be hearing more about that. >> [inaudible] >> i think i can repeat what we've been saying that the way that you get ebola is by direct contact with the body fluids of an ill individual. and if you don't have that, you don't have to worry about ebola. and that's important to point out you must separate the issue of the risk to the general public with the risk of people

like speedy levin and her colleagues. she put herself in a situation where she knew it was a risk because of her character and bravery and that of her colleagues in the field she had to unfortunately get infected. that is a different story from the general public. she was a with a very sick person. >> what have you learned and what experimental drugs if any did you use and what can you teach other doctors suggest doctor spencer in helping him recover? >> we did not administer any experimental drugs while she was here under our care. we followed her and we have a considerable amount of data. remember this is only one patient to read we are in discussion with our colleagues at emory and nebraska we compare notes back and forth and i think it's important for people to understand that there's a public

health issue and there's the scientific issue of understanding what's going on and that is a central lot we do here. but it's to learn from information that might help others. you have a bunch of people you can collect the data on but if you have one or two or three you have to focus very much to get a lot of information. we will gradually be able to say things that are helping others take care of patients. that's the reason we may have done different kinds of tests. [inaudible] there's a lot of reasons why you have to make sure it's a vaccine

candidate because first of all since ebola is a disease that has outbreaks and then disappears, it is difficult to be able to prove something except in the setting of disease which we are trying very hard to do right now when we go from a phase one study where we show that it's safe and that it induces the response that would be protected we are planning a larger efficacy trial that the randomized controlled trial to be able to do that as well as some other designs. in the direct answer to your question you might recall that we started on this ten years ago and we have done different iterations of improvements and one must appreciate that the incentive from a pharmaceutical company to get involved in putting a major investment to develop a vaccine for a disease that up until this outbreak has less than 2500 people infected we didn't have the kind of part

of industry. we certainly have that now so it's not a scientific obstacle or of wanting to have one that is the ability but have the ability to actually bring all the cards together to get that. >> the funding is a very competitive issue i think we should put that off the table because we are talking about what we are doing right now and we are on our way in the sense that we have the capability and the resources to do that trial that will hopefully start at the beginning of 2015. >> can you pinpoint a turning point? i don't want to make a statement on that because she was taken care of my very by very good people in two separate hospitals. so, when she was in texas, she

was in the process of actually doing better. she came to us and continue to do better and better. we both support of her so i cannot pinpoint what was the turning point. the other thing we are happy about is the turning point occurred. >> [inaudible] >> that is conceivable but you can't prove that. the question if you didn't hurt to be -- if you didn't hear was the plasma from doctor brantly but when you have several factors at the same time for the care of a patient is impossible to say this is the thing that did it and this is the thing that didn't do it. i'm not trying to evade it. that's the reason why you want to do clinical studies where you can actually get that information so that the next time we have an outbreak even during this outbreak we can say

this is the recommendation because we know what works. at this point everything is experimental and that is what we are trying to do is take the experimental and make it evidence. >> congratulations and we wish you well as you go home today. who reports about 70% of those in west africa died because of this virus. what explains the speedy recovery of someone like speedy levin and amber vinson? >> again i wish i could give you the answer to that question but we don't know. i can tell you these things as a physician what goes into a patient getting better is anything from she's young and very healthy, number one. number two, she got into a healthcare system that was able to give her intensive care early. number two she was then transferred to another healthcare system that was able to give her everything that she

needed. that's one of the reasons common sense tells you that that contributed. how can you relate that to 70%? it's impossible. >> is the prognosis that she is keyword and any long-lasting effects? >> she is keyword of ebola let's get that clear that's for sure. now long-lasting effects, when you have -- i will give you an example of a few years ago i had a bad influenza and influenza is is pretty old compared to ebola and even though i got back up and went to work, i was feeling tired and worn down so i wouldn't be surprised if over a period of time anyone who has had the experience of recovering from ebola she will whether she gets it back next week or two weeks i don't know.

she's such an incredible lady she's going to do it. >> are there any restrictions right now where she can go and who she can talk to and how does she travel back to dallas >> i will have to leave that confidential write-down because that is personal and private and i don't want to have people on her as she asks for her privacy we will give her privacy. >> is her family allowed to talk and how do you relate to be information? >> we have a system that is easy to communicate. the family talks by phone and face time and things like that so allowing me to use face time.

stick one more and then we have to get her home. >> how confident are you they are getting the information so other healthcare professionals like speedy levin won't wind up in the same situation as they are entering hospitals? >> as you probably have noticed there is a very strong educational efforts going on that is led by the federal government into the cdc playing a major role in that. we are doing a variety of things to educate people and not only educate and people have read training into practice and people that have to get ability of the visibility of recognizing and identifying and isolating all of that is getting scaled up. thank you and we appreciate you being here. [applause] i gave my cell phone number just

in case i get lonely. [laughter] [applause] >> we love you. [applause] doctor anthony fauci announcing that nurse steve of it has been cured of ebola at nih. she is meeting with president obama at this hour. through the hearing earlier asking the question about the effectiveness of the u.s. response. effective would be that it didn't get here at all just the few cases we have have cost billions or didn't anyone think of that?

i listened to the debate campaign 2014 that was between a coral and representative scott peters and it's just politics as usual. what we really need is for the politicians to quit making decisions based on power and money and vote and start working together at a higher level

seeking the best decisions for the american people. when there is any type of political event both republicans and democrats and any other party that wants to get involved should organize it and start from the get go learning to work together and act this event show their constituents and the american people that they can work together at a higher level on all the issues americans are concerned about and get the best decisions by reasoning together instead of it being based on power and money and votes we win and you lose. >> i'm calling to say thank you for airing the debate. i just watched of the vermont governor's date and i admit when

i first saw that there were seven candidates on the stage, i thought it was going to be a circus but i'm glad i got over that and i watched and i was really impressed with some of the ideas that some of the candidates suggestions they made particularly the gentleman that said that an educated workforce is to the benefit of our country so we should be paying students to go to school not charging them and putting them in debt for going to school and i really like the candidates that reminded us that senator jeffords would refuse to debate, to attend any debates that didn't include everybody that was on the ballot. it's time that americans realize we don't have to choose between a democrat and republican. there are more than 100 political parties in this country and it's time that we

started looking at some of the others. thanks again for airing these debates now a british defense committee hearing on current uk foreign policy and the threat of isis the former net you become nato commander for europe and the all-time national division commander for southeast iraq appeared before the panel tuesday. members asked about the u.s. uk relations training iraqi troops and whether the approach in combating isis is working.

welcome, everybody. we are gathered in the session to look at the second round of evidence on the reports for the inquiry into iraq into serious and we are lucky to have with us today doctor douglas was one of the most senior academics on the strategy and counterinsurgency. he is a distinguished professor at the postgraduate school in california and was at the college in rhode island and taught at the united states marine corps university in quantico and the army war college as well as the nato defense college.

his most recent book is specifically on the counterinsurgency which is central to the inquiry because all of these areas between 2006 and 2010 so welcome. to begin i just wonder what you thought are the options to the international coalition and to the current crisis in iraq and serious and what you think would be most effective. >> a few things at the outset, first i am now retired from the government service so what i say is my own opinion.

the second thing i have to point out as i'm not a middle east expert. we have evolved a lot in iraq and afghanistan and mid-level officers in 03 and 04 and one of the motivations writing my book is they were telling me this stuff doesn't work. i also lost to students in afghanistan and i've seen their marriages collapse in these areas and their frustrations so

as they have seen them evaporated. they sort of come to me and we talk about this in class in the reconstruction class from the historical perspective and there's just two questions. we did this in germany and japan after world war ii. why can't we do a marshall plan? so these are some of the questions that have come up. why do british were so successful, why can't we do this so this is where incoming looking at this historically and sort of challenging the record

to say how successful were they? when does one win at insurgency and my book was an attempt to get how the western democracies fight. i concluded there are a lot of sacrifices that one has to make that if you're going to be successful you pay a huge price in terms of the civil military relations and military professionalism that is in many respects because the insurgents insurgent isn't regarded as a lawful combatant and because he or she is not in this case then

they can be treated however. we have the battle of algiers in other words sort of atrocities are sewn into the fabric of counterinsurgency. so that's where i was coming from. now we've got to do to be successful in my opinion is to have the right political environment to succeed. >> maybe we could expand on what your sense is a general petraeus. >> general petraeus was fortunate in many respects. i think his timing was impeccable. al qaeda had a hand in and bar province. al qaeda had many tribes so that

when petraeus arrived some say that it was petraeus who imposed this and another interpretation is that it is actually the people on the ground who understood that there was an opportunity here. they were looking for a protector so what in fact we did was a typical point to the fact. you take the minorities and armed the minorities so they can protect themselves and i'm sure i imagine what they thought is that they were going to get protected like the kurds and so therefore we managed to flip them to temporarily but we the temporarily but we see how a femoral that tactical success was. as soon as we walk out the whole situation to the whole situation deteriorated. >> why does it prove to be so? >> because these people were not protected as the government starts to kill many of the tribal leaders.

since the beginning of a colonial state, the postcolonial state in the middle east we have such hopes for democracy that the full republics have disappeared. so democracy building in iraq did not work. >> we have people saying what we need to do is we need to get the people into hold of the areas in iraq and those can be anything. sometimes people talk about the kurds and the iraqi army and sometimes even talk about the international coalition but the general idea does this seem to be a sensible tragedy?

>> was increasingly happened as the sunni identity has focused her has become identified in this case with anti-western and some who is going to be the local ally? there is not going to be a great loyalty unless you accept that it's over and we are going to reconfigure the middle east and create a sunny state in eastern c-reactive western iraq. that might be a possibility. but right now this other fielders and circled and it's the most radical movement and they have taken the lead and they are the protectors.

right now i would argue. >> there are people that say what we need to do is get boots on the ground and face to face with the enemy. stack what are you going to fight. you're not going to have any support in the local populations was going to happen what's going to happen and i can tell you my students say i don't care about hearts and minds. it's the people hiding these bad guys and we are going to take them out and we don't really care about that so that's going to make the situation worse and lead to more atrocity in my opinion. the trouble is that it's tactics and strategy and i don't see the

strategy. with the coalition is doing at the moment carries on with this. every time since jimmy carter in the 1980s we know the situation and we create the spaces so i think for democracy in the middle east is dead so you have to say what are we trying to achieve? are we going to rebuild this area? we couldn't rebuild iraq. we built it as a shia state so you have roughly 20% of the population who feels that they do not have any stake in that

country. if we put boots on the ground how is that going to be perceived? he's in support of iran and whoever is going to replace maliki. we are going to be there in support. now how much authorization are we going to get? i'm not an expert in this area but i wouldn't think that it was good of you get a lot of people killed not just western soldiers but if of the iraq ease as well. >> but currently -- so it creates and radicalized as the publication further and legitimizes isis. it probably encourages the

fighters is what i imagine and maybe a few in this country in the united states and elsewhere. >> you said all of the interventions make things worse and what ought to be the solution is much more independent and sustainable. is the current engagement as it stands going to make things worse? >> you have to ask yourself where is isis going. it seems to me it's at least to the east and the west it's reached its extreme limit. it can't go into turkey and it's not going to take back because

there are plenty of malicious. it's not going to overthrow so this is sort of it. there is a sunni area that makes a little bit of money i would but i would say one of the things he would think about is do nothing. >> the question is in the humanitarian catastrophe and the lost trade of the region [inaudible] and people are being persecuted for their release in the

religion [inaudible] >> i think that you should think about that as an option. there are a lot of places where you are doing nothing. africa for instance. >> it doesn't mean that you should do more bad things. >> what are you going to accomplish? i'm asking the question. >> if you accept, they face this with libya and elsewhere. because of the stargate would say it's been brought back in

body bags and other politics. i am here to phrasing your views disgracefully but why aren't you advancing? >> you have to have a political goal. if you don't have a viable political goal why would you send soldiers into that situation that they can't accomplish? that's my point. i would never say the war can accomplish nothing. but what is your goal on the gravity of the greatest change the dynamic of the situation. you have to ask that question what is the instinct because if you can't envision an end state then why cannot troops?

in the context of the military establishment that is being done in many other countries what has occurred to you on the use of private companies. using private companies is perfectly all right and iraq and afghanistan was fairly disastrous. these men were out of control in some cases. they were not subject to local

laws. we have several atrocities committed by the private contractors exercising the u.s. army we called at the time and that would trigger the ambush. somebody when they are trained up indigenous soldiers than they are siphoned off to do things like the private contractors themselves. the police and the soldiers in afghanistan are basically

defective. so i don't think that is a good use of one in my opinion. surely on the assumption that isis's expansionism how can you be confident on iraq's army. >> of course one can never be certain but these are guys running around in pickup trucks.

>> again we haven't got into the subject yet but one is for security assistance and the sort of failure training the end of june as armies of the regions and it hasn't worked well in central african. the only place that it worked particularly well in the united states is a great search to how we take a novel way to transition it. they succeeded in being contingent circumstances. you don't have a clash of civilizations here. you have a catholic christian

country now we thought that was under. what do you think about those politics? he fired a lot of the generals and got the strategy on the military and that was ultimately very successful. are you going to have those conditions of the other countries and there is a model you can transition from one to another. in all of these places they said while you don't know what the hierarchy is it doesn't mean you

have all these tribal hierarchies and then they don't use equipment properly and basically you are working when this gets back to the question about contractors. in the military as it would need to be result from the top down and the approach is from the bottom up. it doesn't work well at the operational vacuum. in the seminars for the foreign area officers and for the assistance.

in the unnamed african country they said i just can't sleep at night because i know i'm training an army. >> we are talking of the consequence of the illegal and perhaps i wonder if we could ask you suggested that we should walk by on the other side where i would ask should we not be the good samaritan and allow people to endanger as they speak and are being obliterated? >> what is the national interest of britain and the united

states? initially is to spread democracy. this is what we were going to do in iraq. that hasn't worked. now it's energy secure. they have to sort of ask themselves do we really need the middle east anymore? what purpose does it serve with all these other sources of energy. maybe we can walk away from it and if we do that, then we have to say alright what do we have to prepare for. one of the things we have to prepare for in the short term are descriptions of energy supplies until we get our fraking or whatever else we want to do and prepare for the humanitarian relief because there's already been lots of bad

stuff that's happened so prepare for that and that it seems to me would be one of the things we could do from the christian perspective and humanitarian perspective and then work politically. we need allies in the region to try to stabilize the place. maybe through turkey that that passion or bathroom today to defend the town in the north. but there are so many agendas in the middle east. it's only one. you've got the gulf states that have their own agendas and turkey is going to demand a huge price. all of these things are going to change. they can slip overnight so how do you plan a political strategy and you put your soldiers in the middle of that. i think we have -- again i am

thinking personally i think that we have a moral obligation to do what we can do. i think we have a moral obligation to our people and our own soldiers first and i think there is a strong argument to say don't put them in a situation in which they will get killed and they will have to commit atrocities he caused all of this will have to come home into the revision of the periphery is you will have atrocities and degradations coming you're going to have a degradation of military professionalism stand in the states, militarization of the police. this is what you're going to have if you do this. >> coming home in the british perspective it is estimated that there are 500 citizens who are

currently fighting in the islamic state which i think gives it a status that it doesn't want because they are terrorists but they are there fighting and if this continues they may wish to come home in the united kingdom. they might possibly wish to continue the terrorism atrocities so don't you think that britain has a role to play? you risk those numbers if you intervene. that would be my suggestion.

you did mention turkey and that is an area that i would like to pursue. to what extent or lack of support for the impact on the strategy to destroy the terrorist forces quick >> again you have me out of my depth here. i have no insight but we know he hates a al-assad and it will be some sort of a regime so that will be one way in which we will have differences of opinion. obviously turkey can provide the basis and boots on the ground. what exactly were you thinking when you said lawrence of arabia to dismantle the empire?

he has a lot of leverage on us and what will he demand in return for his qualification? ..

damage, extend the battlefield and escalate a situation, without any viable political end in sight. >> my last question, dr. porch, is that it has been suggested that if the tarrance group isil is defeated -- terrorist group, they will be replaced by something worse, although i find it difficult to think what could be worse. if so, what should be international coalition strategy? would it be flexible enough to take on a new threat should the terrorists in their current form be defeated? >> al-qaeda emergency is in whatever form, isil is the latest one, where ever there is a rebellion against a shia regime. they're always going to appear. you've also got to realize the middle east is one of the most wired regions in the world.

there's no al-jazeera for latin america for instance. but al-jazeera in a way has played the role of unifying islamic i would say public opinion, certainly arab public opinion from morocco to the far east. in any of these rebellions are presented as a justified popular uprisings and they will get support all over the region. >> that's interesting. thank you very much. >> in your list of possible in one, energy security and so forth, one you did not mention was preventing another 9/11. don't you think it is perfectly chip legitimate to take action against isil to prevent similar outrageous? >> there is a difference of opinion about what sort of

threat it poses to the homeland, both yours and mine. one argument would be that the threat is insulated, that intelligence organizations now have a vested interest in insulating it. the threat could certainly be there. i'm just saying that that is one of the arguments. on the other hand, i think we have intelligence services in both of our countries that are pretty proficient i would argue in tracking these things down. and that if you intervene you're actually going to have more threats, not less. that would be my argument. >> dr. porch, finally before let you go, return to the nub of the issue. the basic model on how to deal with the process of isil, al-qaeda iraq, was counterinsurgency. go in, search, clear, hold, built. the solution is that it's

nothing proposed from your president seems to be that you contain il and you somehow create the space for the time for the iraqi state to get in there and clear, hold, build, and create effective, legitimate and credible state structures, the iraqi army gets into mosul and gets in and bar and someone turned the situation around. how i characterize it that probably and what would be your analysis of that kind of theory? >> i would think that's the best case scenario. i think that's going to happen? know, because we've already seen how a shia regime handles this. the other problem we are going to have is the same one as one man in afghanistan. we're going to have a safe haven across the border into syria or whatever you want to call it, just like the taliban and pakistan. you can't get added so they're going to continue to attack and stabilize. then what do you do? are you going to be like the french in algeria where you