united together what they have really done has made it very difficult for parties to be major players in terms of the message ad. >> and when you look at who's in the groups, basically the voice that's gotten ampified is the voice of the super wealthy, the people that can give a million is a lot louder than it's ever been before, or $10 million. >> edward mcbride with the kp s economist. we have seen john mccain saying he was not going to do negative ads and then getting hammered and then his negatives ads were a great things. what about 2010, if you sort of trumpet yourself as being positive, does that make any head way with voters? is there any evidence on that?

>> yes, there was the negative ads and -- without his positive message, the whole thing was based on the idea of hope and change. and it's sort of interesting to watch the very few videos that the obama campaign has actually put out so far where they're trying to figure out how to continue that positive message and highlight his accomplishments as president and put it out there in an environment where there's a lot of criticism of him. >> how bad would negative ads really be in a debate that we saw on tuesday night, wednesday night, ron paul simply looked at rick santorum and said, you're a fake. that's going to conclude, i want to than ken and bob and jane, i want to thank new america for having us.

>> coming up live today on book tv.org, mr. brock contends that mr. ales, a former media consultant brought a conservative political agenda to fox news when he was hired in 1996. the author will speak at politics and pros bookstore in washington, d.c. and we'll have that live streaming on our website, book tv.org. and rick santorum wraps up campaigning in michigan ahead of the state's primary tomorrow. he'll be at the heritage christian academy in kalamazoo. >> louisiana governor bobby jindal is prepared to expose his

political agenda, a budget $900 million in the red. in shreveport bossier now it's cloudy and 37 degrees. you're listening to shreveport bossier's news and weather station. >> this weekend, book tv and american history tv explore the history and literary culture of shreveport, louisiana. saturday starting at noon eastern on cspan2 on book tv. the red river campaign of 1864. and then a look at the over 200,000 books of the john smith museum. then a walking tour of shreveport and bossier city with neil johnson. and on american history tv on cspan3 at 5:00 p.m. eastern, from barks dale afc, a history

of the b-52 bomber. also visit the founding fathers autograph collection and from is pioneer heritage center, medical treatment and medicine during the civil war. shreveport, louisiana, this weekend on cspan2 and cspan3. there are millions of american who is want to sacrifice for change, but they want it to be nonthreatening. these are the people whose voice i want to be. >> as candidates campaign for president this year, we look back at 14 men who ran for the office and lost. go to our website cspan.org/the contenders to see video on the contenders and the impact they had on american politics. >> do you remember when times were really hard and we left the doors unlocked? now we have the most violent

crime ridden society in the industrialized world. now i can't live with that. can you live with that? >> no! >> cspan.org/thecontenders. national intelligence director james clapper recently testified at a senate arms serviced hearing focusing on u.s. threats to national security.her topics of discussi included security threats in iraq and afghanistan as well as cyber security threats to the u.s. carl levin of michigan chairs this senate armed services committee hearing, it's about two hours and 50 minutes. good morning, everybody. we start by welcoming our witnesses for today's hearing on current and longer term threats and challenges around the world. we're glad to have the director of national intelligence, james

clamper and dia director general ron burgess as our witnesses. we thank you both for your long and continued service to our nation on behalf of our troops to whom we all owe so much. this committee has a special responsibility to the men and women of our armed forces, to be vigilant, decisions to use our military force and the planning for operations depends so heavily on intelligence. last year there are clear signs of progress in afghanistan, afghan security forces are in the lead in providing security in kabul, including during the gathering of over 2,000 afghan

lead leaders. the afghan army and police are in charge of former taliban strong holds in southern afghanist afghanistan. in addition planners have developed a plan for the military's combined team operation. the afghan army is widely respected and even the afghan police, traditionally lagging far behind in that virtue are gaining increasing respect among the afghan people. nevertheless, security remains fragile. the key to progress on security in afghanistan is the process of transitioning the lead for securing the afghan people from coalition forces to the afghan security forces, the transition process is under way and continues a pace with a afghan police assuming a security lead in more and more areas throughout the country. we heard on tuesday from the

chairman of the joint chiefs of staff general dempsey that the trance addition process is on track, to meet the goal of having the afghan security forces take the lead throughout afghan by 2014. successful transition is going to depend on a number of factors, including the growth in the capabilities of the afghan army and police and their readiness to take the security lead, the nature of the insurgency, and progress on reconciliation talks, i would be interested in hearing our witness's assessment of the current security interests in afghanistan and their views on the progress both in the terms of providing security and in the transition and for possibilities for reconciliation with the taliban. i'm concerned by recent news reports that the latest national

intelligence estimate -- over the security situation in afghanistan. according to these news reports, the nie contains a set of additional comments endorsed by coalition commander general allen, ambassador crocker, central command commander general mat tis and european commander admiral stavrisus. i hope our witnesses will address the differences of views in the nie. security in afghanistan is going to remain in jeopardy so long as there continues to be sanctuary in pakistan for insurgents conducting cross bored attacks against u.s. coalition and afghan forces and against the afghan people. pakista pakistan'sry fusal to go after

the network in north waziristan and the taliban -- belies pakistan's assertions that it is committed to peace and security in the region. pakistan's support which former chairman of the joint chiefs of staff admiral mullen called it a veritable arm of the isi is a major cause for u.s.-pakistan relations reaching it's lowest pace. we need to understand the intelligence community's assessment of mack stan's strategy with respect to these insurgent groups and the reconciliation process as to pakistan's power to determine -- and as to pakistan's power to determine outcomes. the u.s. campaign against the

global jihadist movement as director clamper's opening statement called it had a number of notable exception -- these successes struck major blows to al qaeda senior leadership into one of its most active affiliates. as a result of these operations, and sustained pressure in pakistan, yemen, somalia and north africa, al qaeda and it's affiliates are showi ining stre. we would be interested in the committee's -- whether it signals an increased threat to the united states and our interests from somalia. sued presidential study director tim which identifies the prevention of mass acrossities and genocide

as a core national security interest and moral responsibility of the united states. i'm pleased to see director clamper has included in his testimony a instruction of the importance of the prevention of mass atrocities and the immediate for the intelligence community to report on these incidents rapidly so as to inform policy makers of these deeply concerning events. over the past year, the international community has acted to prevent a mass atrocity in libya, but we're currently witnessing a mass atrocity in syria. these tragedies have resulted in deaths of many civilians seeking their universal freedoms and stabilizing an extensive use of the region. now relative to iran, which is obviously a major topic. excuse me, there's a strong by partisan determination on this

committee and in this congress to do all that we can to counter the threat posed by iran and in particular, to stop iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. in the most recent defense authorization act, we made a major break through with respect to iran's sanctions by requiring foreign financial institutions to choose between maintaining ties with the u.s. financial system or doing business with the central bank of iran, especially relative to the purchase of iranian petroleum and related products. president obama has appropriately focused considerable and determined diplomatic effort to prevent iran from getting a nuclear weapon and he has repeatedly said there are no option office the table to achieve that goal. the midwestern people are entitled to a clear intelligence community estimate about the length of time it would take

iran to construct a usable nuclear weapon, if and when they decide to produce one, and how likely it is it that they will decide to do so. a recent report discussing iran's apparent willingness to host and support senior al qaeda leaders and facilitators. this is a matter that has not received a great deal of attention in recent years, however if true, a sanction of al qaeda could produce some of the group's more senior leaders and potentially provide iran with a dangerous proxy. the committee looks forwards to the director's testimony on that matter as well. on syria, the recent voeto by te united nations security counsel has bolstered the assad regime and has regrettably demonstrated

the willingness of china and russia to support regimes seeking to crush individuals who are seeking a better and a freer life. we hope that the directors here will share with the committee what we know about the individuals seeking to overthrow the assad regime. what do we know about who is supplying the assad regime with weapons? what the regime's intentions are, and what we know about the willingness of the syrian military to continue to kill and maim their own country men. relative to iraq, despite the political, economic and security challenges that confront iraq, the government's leaders appear to be willing to work generally together, to resolve issues politically rather than through violence. while there is much this new democracy needs to do to build a true stable and sovereign nation, we would like to hear

our witness's views on the iraqi progress to date, and their outlook for compromise. we also look for un -- in what is the iraqi government's commitment and capability to deal with that influence or their willingness to deal with that influence. i'm going to put my comments relative to china and the asia pacific in general in the record and end with just a comment on signer security. -- cyber security. director clamper's prepared statement-cyber security threat to our country and our economy in the top tier of threats alongside of terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. and that's surely where that cyber threat belongs. a recent report from the national counter intelligence

checkive stated that entities operating from within china and in russia are responsible for the massive and routine theft of u.s. commercial and military technology and that could threaten our national security and our prosperity. it is important to know what our intelligence community regards this economic espionage as, whether it is a significant national security threat, and also whether that view is shared by our policymakers and whether china would believe that we are just bluffi ining if we talk ab ending normal trade relations with the economic espionage and counterfeiting and theft of our spe intellectual property to end.

we have arranged for a closed session in room s.b.c. 217 following this open session in the event that such a closed session is necessary. senator mccain. >> thank you, mr. chairman and let me join you in welcoming general clamper and general burgess and thanking them for their many years of distinguished service. i also want to take this opportunity to express our enormous gratitude to the men and women of our intelligence community. it is a truism that intelligence often fails publicly, but succeeds privately. i only wish the american people could know the full extent of what our intelligence community does to keep us safe. today's hearing is a fitting companion to the one this committee held on tuesday to review the annual budget request for this department's request as well as a broader proposal to

cut -- secretary defense panetta and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff told this committee on tuesday, the administration's plans, reductions in defense spending that will entail greater threats to our military, and to our national security. this stands to reason, but what does not is why we would choose to increase the already growing risk to our national security at this time? just consider the scale and scope of these risks. despite the remarkable damage inflicted on al qaeda's core leadership by our military and intelligence professionals, al qaeda affiliates in iraq, the horn of africa are growing stronger, more independent, more diffuse and more willing to attack american interests. as evidenced by their plot to assassinate the saudi ambassador in a washington restaurant, the leader of iran pose a more

direct slthreat to us. and that is on top of the hostile actions which iran kill iraq and afghanistan, supporting terrorist groups across the middle east, destabilizing arab countries, propping up and rearming the ra saassad regime syria. the threat posed by the regime could bring the middle east to the brink of war, if if it's not there already. north korea is in the midst of a potentially dangerous and destabilizing transition. an inexperienced 29-year-old is now in charge of a government that continues to produce nuclear weapons, develop ever more sophisticated ballistic missiles, threaten our ally in the republic of korea, and administer the most brutal

apparatus of state opregnanpress any country on earth. the peoples republic of china continues with a nontransparent buildup missile tear forces while engaging in proceed vok tich acts against neighbors in international waters. indeed, tensions in the south china sea have rarely been higher. at the same time, the number and sophistication of cyber attacks on american targets by chinese actors likely with chinese government involvement in my cases is growing increasingly severe and damaging. indeed, last year's report from the office of the national counterintelligence executive makes clear, quote, chinese actors are the world's most active and persistent perpetrators of economic espionage."

p in afghanistan the taliban insurgery is damaged but not broken and regrettably their will to stay in the foegs in the international coalition in our afghan partners has been increased by the administration's repeated public commitments to certain dates for withdrawing down our military forces regardless of conditions on the ground. meanwhile, pakistan remains as fragile and combustible as ever, and as our witnesses' statements make clear, pakistan's intelligence service continues to support terrorist elements inside afghanistan that are attacking and killing americans. in iraq the fragile stability and democratic gains that iraqis are able to forge thanks to the surge now seen to be unraveling. prime minister al maliki is consolidating his power as the expense of the other political blocs. violence is up significantly since the departure of u.s.

troops. al qaeda in iraq and violent shia extremist groups are still very much active and threatening to iraq's stability. it is increasingly difficult to argue that iraq, to use the president a president's words is, quote, stable and self-reliant. one year into the arab spring the situation is fluid and in places very troubling. and libya to egypt, yemen bahrain, countries are undergoing monumental changes and the outcome is still far from clear. then there is syria, where the conflict appears to be entering a new phase, more than 6,000 lives have been lost, and there appears to be no end in sight. the bloodshed must be stopped, and we should rule out no option that could help save lives. we must consider among other actions providing opposition groups inside syria both

political and military with better means to organize their activities to care for the wounds, to find safe havens, to communicate securely and defend themselves and to fight back again assad's forces. the time has come when all options must be on the table to end the killing and force assad to leave power. we could continue for some time listing the myriad of other threats facing our nation, and i'm confident we'll cover most of them in tonigday's hearing. what should be clear is that by no objective as sesment are the threats to our national security decreasing. to the contrary they're increasing as the prepared testimonies of our witnesses make vividly clear. so the question that members of congress and the members of this committee in particular need to think long and hard about it is this.

why in an international environment of growing uncertainty, risk and threats would we choose to add to those risks by making large and misguided cuts to the national defense budget. cuts that by themselves will not significantly reduce our national debt, the real driver of which is our domestic entitlement programs. i don't see a compelling answer to this question at this time, and i imagine today's hearing will underscore that point. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you so much, senator mccain, director clapper. >> thank you, chairman low man, ranking member mccain, distinguished members of the committee for inviting us to present the 2012 worldwide threat assessment. i'm joined today by the director of the defense intelligence agency, my friend and colleague of long-standing lieutenant general ron burg guess.

these remarks and our statement reflect the collective insights of the extraordinary men and women of the united states intelligence community whom you've recognized and we most appreciate that and whom it is our privilege and honor to lead. we're most appreciative of your acknowledgment of the work sometimes under very hazardous conditions that are done by the men and women of the community around the world. we won't attempt to cover the full scope of worldwide threats in these brief, oral remarks, so i'd like to identify some of the issues we identify for the coming year, some of which you've done for us as i already said. earlier this month was the 51st anniversary of my enlistment in the marine corps. during my subsequent and entire career, i don't recall a more complex and interdependent array of challenges than we face today. the capabilities, technologies, know-how, communications and

environmental forces aren't confined by borders and can trigger transnational drpupgss with astonishing speed. never before has the intelligence community been called upon to master complexity on so many issues in a resource con strained environment. we're rising to the challenge by continuing to integrate the intelligence community taking advantage of new technologies, implementing new efficiencies and as always simply working hard. but candidly maintaining the world's premier intelligence enterprise in the face of our shrinking budget will be a challenge. we'll be accepting and managing risk more so than in the last decade. when i say "we," i mean the legislative and the executive. we begin our threat assessment as we did last year with the global issues of terrorism and proliferation. the intelligence community sees the next two to three years as a critical transition phase for the terrorist threat particularly for al qaeda and

like-minded groups. with osama bin laden's death, they loss an iconic and inspirational leader. the new leader is less charismatic and the death or capture has sun leadership lair. with the degraded capabilities and the focus on smaller plots, al qaeda remains long as we sus pressure, we judge that core al qaeda will be largely symbolic importance to the jihadist movement. but recent affiliates and small cells and individuals drive the global jihad agenda. proliferation, that is, efforts to develop, acquire or spread weapons of mass destruction is also a major global strategic threat. among nation states, as you've alieded, iran's technical advances particularly in uranium enrichment strengthen our

assessment they can produce a weapon if its political leaders, specifically the supreme leader himself, chooses to do. the ballistic missiles to several countries including iran and syria illustrate the reach of the north's proliferation activities. we don't expect that kim jong-un, north korea's new young leader to change pyongyang's policy to attempt to export most of its weapons system. i note that in this year's statement of the record that you noted yourself that we elevated our discussion of cyber threats to follow terrorism and proliferation. and perhaps in something of a cole-new castle it to confirm cyber threat is one of the most challenges ones we face. we see an environment in which he mooernlg merging technology are developed and implemented before security responses are put in