alpha for business. the current uncertainty created by the existing plan, while the moratorium only applies to deep water activities, related actions have created -- the of only approved to applications to permit to drill in the shallow waters. . .

>> i am speaking on behalf of oceania. we have more than 4000 supporters from countries in all 50 -- from supporters in all 50 states and around the country. the deepwater horizon drilling disaster is a clear testament that offshore drilling is a dirty and dangerous business, one that threatens jobs, public health, and the health of marine ecosystems. with 200 million gallons of oil into million gallons of this person stepped into the cult of mexico -- dumped into the gulf

of mexico the entire body of water remains threatens. much of the wildlife impacts will remain unseen. oil could have a long-term of the exarch the feedback, reproductive, and overall health of the animal. specifi-- oil can havea hopes a- term affeclong-term effect on tr reproductive and overall health of the animal. 192 to $260 million in income and between 8011 thousand jobs. the impact on tourism is also

severe. it is estimated this bill will cost the gulf region between 7.6 and $22.7 billion over a period of three years. oil companies must be held accountable for accidents like this. the government must remove the liability caps, which the oil companies are fully responsible for their actions and fully compensatete those affected by their actions. while this is a harsh lesson, the commission to ensure it is never repeated. in the arctic, dangers walter are just as severe as in the deep water in the gulf. the weather is unpredictable. there are long times of darkness and hazardous ice conditions. it is called incredibly remote for response.

we must also reinstate permanent projections for areas that were predicted for years under presidential and congressional moratorium. we also need to take the arctic off the table. the deepwater drilling disaster shows us that current technology and regulation cannot prevent what is inevitable, a major spill. the deepwater drilling raster shows that the activities outweigh any perceived benefit that can be from the drilling. >> thank you. >> i am speaking on behalf of earth justice. first, thinking to the members of the national commission. -- thank you to the members of the national commission. we look forward to seeing your findings at the end of this process. the tragic explosion highlighted

in that case for regulating offshore drilling in approving spill response plans. the commission plays a critical role in identifying this and proposing changes to address them. government officials accepted assurances of the oil industry that technological improvements meant an oil spill was impossible. the industry assured regulators it has the ability to respond. those insurance is approved as faulty as the response to the deepwater horizon disaster. as a result, the commission must examine the wreckage were framed a governing will spork response requirements from a position of independence and critical evaluation. the administration decision to suspend summer exploration drilling was the right one. more decision points are approaching, and as arctic drilling is continudebated, thel

of mexico's bill should be looked at. in the gulf result of failed save a blowout preventer fail and when it was time to respond, the oil spill response plan was inadequate and prove to be much less effective than it was stated. the implications of the disaster of this scale are immense. just like the gulf of mexico, industry assured regulators that catastrophic spills never have been. crude bridgette of crude exploration plans failed to consider the possibility of a plot. -- the crude exploration plan failed to consider the possibility of a blowout. spill response capacities are minuscule in the arctic compared to the call. the closest coastguard station is more than 1,000 miles away.

the nearest airport that is able to handle cargo planes is 100 miles per way. -- 100 miles away. we cannot continue to ignore the risks and consequences. the commission's independent evaluation can help assure that the companies that want to drill for oil in our ocean have concrete answers on how to prevent and respond to an oil spill. in the arctic week left baseline data about natural resources. decisions about whether to proceed with drilling must be useuse the results of this billd the call. >> hello. i am a private citizen. i would like to thank the commission for the opportunity to speak.

and the federal register notice for waste from the exploration, development and production of crude oil and natural gas, at the epa exempted various crude oil products and waste from treatment. i would like to have the commission at least consider whether or not they believe that in light of the bp deepwater horizon oil spill that is worth reconsidering whether to classify oil leaks because it would help to get rid of the ways in a more structured way than they are right now. thank you. an>> good afternoon and thank yu to the commission for giving us the ability to testify today. i am the oceans advocates at ocean's america. i have worked extensively on the issue of offshore drilling for five years.

it is the washington, d.c. office of the federation of 29 state grassroot operations. 16 of our state organizations are on coastal regions are coastal states. -- our coastal states. i am here to review the statutory reforms and regulatory reforms and structural reforms that our community believes are needed. oslo was drafted decades ago. it is badly in need of being updated. our purpose statements states the need for developing resources. we believe that we should update this to make it clear that

leasing exploration and production will occur only where and when activities can be pursued what preserving and protecting the health of the oceans. in many places we believe the underlying natural resources and a sustainable use is will be more important than the underlying a non-renewable oil and gas assets. section 18 is the heart of the planning requirements. we believe it should be rewritten to required detailed planning and environmental analysis for much smaller units and the ocean than are currently considered. we believe it should be amended to give other agencies much larger roles in the planning stage for where and when to do leasing and greater imports and exploration and development decisions and permitting. -- greater input. it should be required to identify worst-case oil spill

scenarios. let me remind the panel, the commission, that the dirty little secret is that no matter how much you try, no matter how much money to spend, typically in an open ocean, only 16 percent of the oil can ever be cleaned up. having plans in place should not give us a false sense of security as to what the damage ultimately from these bills will be. the other point i would make is that people like to talk about these events as one in a million, but there have been 4000. this bill is about 01 and 4500 event, hardly one and a million. -- this spill is about a one in 4500 event, they wahardly one a

million. >> i am grateful for the opportunity submit comments at this hearing and a boy in ways to prevent and mitigate future oil spills. the goal is to inform the agency on decisions in the public about decision making processes. we're designed to expose the tech risk that led to the oil spill and the environmental catastrophe. by mandating and informed decision making, we are designed to draw attention to the very brisks the mineral management service ignored -- the various risks the mineral management service ignored.

these recommendations are encouraging first step on the way to further-needed reforms. we urge the commission to it buys us to go further and pursue the following reports of the printing process under the after continental centsschock land ac. we believe the use of any chemical exclusion and permitting offshore drilling is not in accordance with the law. according to federal regulation, these exclusions are only applicable to actions that do not have significant effect on human environment. even in the absence of a catastrophic events, such as an oil spill, the impacts associated with normal drilling operations include noise, air, and water pollution. really impacts individual and cumulative on the human environment are significant. therefore, we urge the commission to advise that the

use of any excuse and in the permitting process is not in accordance with the law and should be prohibited. an environmental review of exploration plan should not be subjected to short time frames. instrumental in making any decision is providing the agency was sufficient time to conduct a robust environmental review. currently it is mandate that the plan be approved within 30 days or the plan will be subject to default approval. such a short time frame promotes expedient decisions, rather than wise ones. we advise 90 days or more to re- elect a more realistic time frame. i think the commission for this opportunity to provide comments. >> thank you, sir. >> i am representing consumer

energy alliance. on behalf of c.e.a. i appreciate the opportunity to comment on the deepwater horizon explosion. we're a nonprofit nonpartisan organization committed to working with an elected leaders, affect its stakeholders and consumers to help create sound energy policies and maintain stable energy prices. we have 140 affiliated agencies. including manufacturers, small businesses, and community organizations, as well as a network of almost 280,000 consumer advocates. as the federal government continues to review the circumstances and consequences, i ask that the national commission and other federal policymakers carefully consider the positive economic impacts that robust and offshore development have on the gulf coast region and nationwide.

we strongly oppose the administration's decision to employment and open-ended moratorium on drilling, as well as the failure to implement a regulatory framework that safely resumes offshore development. further, the continued regulatory permitting delays with regard to offshore energy and alaska racises additional concern. the alaska pipe plans, the permanent funds, and tens of thousands of alaska jobs continue on oil and natural gas development. quite simply, the administration's continued delay in resuming offshore energy is contributing to higher unemployment, a crippled economy, and less stable supplies of affordable energy. even more troubling, our recent article reports the department of interior was fully aware that over 23,000 jobs would be lost

as a consequence of the suspension and deepwater drilling on top of the billions in lost revenue for state and local governments. this is vital components of the national energy strategy as demand for oil and natural gas continues to increase for the foreseeable future. furthermore, offshore energy development creates an supports hundreds of thousands of jobs. we cannot afford to unnecessarily critical supplies off-limits that can be safely leveraged into good-paying jobs and affordable energy for struggling american families and small businesses. in conclusion, we urged the national commission and the administration to act with efficiency and setting boundaries. we also urge you to work properly with the federal government. thank you. >> i am eleanor schwartz.

i reckon, bridgette represent the california state lands commission. -- i. prefer represent the california state lands commission. they have oil and gas leases, onshore and offshore, and have responsibility for trying to prevent oil spills entering terminals. last friday on august 20, the state lands commission adopted a resolution based on a study of deepwater horizon oil spill in comparison with california practices, which i will be glad to leave with you. they have put a lot of thought into this. perhaps a little known fact is that they have 1000 to 1100 wells offshore. they have low incidence of oil spills. in the last 10 years it seems to

be averaging less than half a barrel per year. maybe up to 12 spills, but they measure it in drops and ounces. i hope you will take some of their ideas into account as you put your thoughts together about dealing with oil spills. there are eight principles consistent with existing and proposed state law. the idea is to look at ways of strengthening federal laws and regulations. first, they are looking to see that federal laws or repeal or substantially increase the current cap on liability for offshore oil spills. in the second, to require it the best available technologies for design and operations. third, to establish stronger standards for a blowout

preventers, well-designed, and cementing programs. next, mandating the use of force case planning scenarios for relief well time lines. the call for monthly inspections of offshore drilling facilities with more frequent current troubles -- with more frequent intervals where there are safety isolations. they want to protect whistle- blowers who worked for offshore energy operations. and improve the federal government's capabilities relating to oil spill preparedness, prevention, response, a restoration, research, and oversight. lastly, the commission urges a permanent ban on new offshore drilling off of california. i appreciate your time. i hope you'll take a look at

their report and resolution. thank you for your attention. >> thank you for the report. we look forward to examining its. >> i want to thank the commission for allowing the public comment period. this is the first time i have seen senator gramm not wear a florida tie. this became something we were used to. it is interesting. i agree and i go most of the comments other members of the interminable community made about reforming the way we do offshore drilling policy. and the changes needed to how we do things off the coast. i want to touch briefly on three topics. one is we hope the commission keeps the focus on cult restoration -- on gulf restoration. we hope this commission

continues to keep the public's focus on that, especially after the rig has been capped and the issue may move all of the front pages. we do like a lot of the reforms that have been proposed by the interior department in the wake of this bispill. we also urge you to take a look at what congress is doing. a lot of really good reforms are included in the bill that we think have been long overdue and are very pragmatic and how we will look at the future of offshore drilling. we do like the house and senate bill when it comes to unlimited liability. number three, of course, we do think this bill is a wake-up call in time for our nation to move off of fossil fuels.

to that end, we would like to see the u.s. get off of oil within 20 years. it is a very ambitious goal, but when we need to do in order to clean up the air, protect the environment, make us more energy efficient and secure and also to come back and fight cuomo warmicombat global warming. we think a key component would be a ban on new drilling to halt th. we think those are three important steps. the bottom line is this is an industry that has problems that makes mistakes, and we do not think the trade-off is worth for anything the only -- the united

states only has 3% of the world's oil reserves. we do think we can innovate are wait out of that. thank you for your time and for the time to speak. >> thank you. >> i am appearing today as assistant concerned about the matter is and also as to terms on the investigation board, which investigated onshore industrial facilities, catastrophic failures. notwithstanding what my prayer colleague was dating, i do want to elevate one dimension i am thankful that you and your staff have brought before today's deliberations, and that is that this incident is first and foremost a monumental failure of process safety. you have delved deeply into this question with a number of your

panelists, and i think the focus you can bring to this through further analysis and ultimate recommendations will have ramifications, both beyond the shores of this nation, and also the shores of some many other nations who are looking to guidance on what we have learned so far. i think process safety and onshore industry would also benefit from your deliberations. history should be a great teacher in this area, and your first panelist elevated some of the major catastrophic events. i urge you to consider working with your staff to delve deeper into the of the events -- into the alpha event. one of the most fundamental things that occur from the commission, was health and safety functions into the health

and safety executive, a premier health and safety organization respected around the world, but without the encumbrances of trying to also broker of shore profitability of mining mineral resources. they also precipitated the development of the safety case, which you have heard about today. i think there are many lessons to be learned from the imitation -- from the implementation of those programs. we have heard about the aggressive regulatory presence. we lack that right now and offshore and onshore process safety industries involving petroleum. both of those entities in norway and the u.k. could lend enormous knowledge about how to tool up an effective regulatory presence

with the correct amount of oversight. finally, i would like to sit the chemical safety board's investigation into the 2005 event provides a lot of important insights into a catastrophic failure prevention. i think you should team with the chemical safety board, who is currently investigating this event to make sure your optimizing the synergies of both entities. thank you. >> i am with the national wildlife federation who has been on the grounds in the gulf four years before this happened and has been on the prime working with the response team since the oil spill has happened. i would like to my focu focus my attention to one area. the royalties that they are required to pay in the united

states. it is clear that state and federal government do not have adequate dedicated resources to ensure proper response readiness and to make ongoing investments in critical ecosystems that have been and will continue to be impacted by the oil and gas development, including and especially the rapidly disappearing wetlands of the mississippi delta. according to a 2008 report, the government takes from chilling -- the government ranks 93rd laws of 104 oil and gas systems evaluated. at the same time, according to a 2007 study, out of 178 countries, the united states ranked third on the list the most favorable places to conduct business. given the attractiveness of conducting business in the u.s. and the remaining available oil and gas reserves in the gulf, the gao recommended that

interior conduct a full re- evaluation of the fiscal system. interior has not conducted a full valuation of more than 25 years. in april 2010, the department of interior announced they would fund a study to examine u.s. royalty rates as opposed to other countries. the final study is expected to be released in early 2011. in addition to providing revenue for policing the industry and providing adequate readiness response, additional revenues from offshore drilling should be used to restore the gulf ecosystem. off the coast of louisiana, a wetland area larger than the state of delaware has disappeared, in part due to the industry's activities. now with bonds let bridgette

onslaught with tens of thousands of -- now with onslaught with tens of thousands of oil going into the system, assistance is needed more than ever. the national wildlife federation looks for to sharing our thoughts and experiences with the commission on all of your work, including on what we have spoken about today. thank you for your time. >> thank you. >> good afternoon. i am with the gulf restoration network, an agency working to restore the marine and ecosystems and assisting communities that rely upon them. i would like to ask you consider the establishment of regional citizens advisory council's political of mexico and to restore sources of coal for the

dedication. advisory cancels or legislated for alaska and the oil pollution act -- advisory councils where legislative for alaska and the oil pollution act. the gulf of mexico r.c.a.c.'s would give citizens the opportunity to oversee the industry. they would monitor oil and gas exploration activities, assess environmental impacts, and determine spill prevention and preparedness. they would make recommendations to ensure the oil and gas activities are environmentally sound and safe, and not

disproportionately impact fall and would help promote the resilience and well-being of coastal communities. we are exploring any opportunities to move this legislatively, but there have not been many opportunities. there is very strong support in the house and in the senate. we believe there have been and four in lessons learned by the operating over the last two decades in alaska, and we are prepared to assist you in any way in developing one for the gulf of mexico. second, many of you have noted that we are presented with the unique opportunity to focus on restoring the gulf, but we're finding that there are limited sources of dedicated funding for

this purpose. there remain elusive. please keep this as a central element of your recommendations and of writing this wrong. thank you very much. >> hello, again. last time i was talking about marine salvage capabilities in the u.s. and try to encourage you to talk to supervisors to look at this problem in terms of the loss of the platform. today i would like to talk about the use of subcontractors in the oil and gas industry, which is quite pervasive. to look at this in terms of whether you think it is better for the nation on a whole to have a system as a accept contractors -- as subcontractors or whether expertise would serve the interests of the u.s. better in terms of having better accountability.

u.s. seen through some of the other investigative bodies, there is a mass of finger- pointing exercise under way. those of you familiar with the business in general understand that well you can express mandates to your subcontractors, you cannot truly manage them in the way you do your employees. when things really get controversial, you have to back off legally. i hope you can look at that. you develop experts, which are more qualified than they are often in larger systems, but that comes at a cost. i would like to close by talking about the moratorium. i was moved by the people of the goals and their pleas to do things to end the moratorium as soon as possible. -- i was moved by the people of

the gulf and their pleas of to do things to end the moratorium as soon as possible. the best way is to work as fast as possible. all the you have a six month window to look at option of even moving faster than that. i know your meeting monthly. i hope you entertain the option of meeting more often than that and try to get this in early. it does not happen very often in d.c. that we do things on time, if not early. thank you. >> my name is norsk mcdonnell. we aren't environmental group. the center provided input into the inner agency ocean policy task in washington, d.c.

the center is a member of the marine fish conservation network. the center will continue to work to reestablish the moratorium on expanded drilling. the mcconnell bill weld should be put into production by a responsible -- the well picked should be put into production by a responsible company. a significant portion should go to the benham -- families and the people killed in the explosion. additional revenue should go to the economic relief by the gulf of economies that have been affected by the oil spill disaster. we oppose of the moratorium because of the harm of the gulf economy and our belief that other companies have been acting responsibly.

the center, through its members somhip arm, is pursuing ownershp stakes. this is an effort by us to gain equity in the energy sector. aeblacks in government have raid the issue a few often no blacks and mms. citing the lack of diversity among senior management, we see the good old boys network. i am very confident that my comments will receive the

appropriate weight because william reilly. that is because he is a legend in the environmental justice movements. william reilly received a standing ovation from the internment of justice activist from all over the country at our last meeting with the agency was trying to get environmental justice establish at the agency. he established in our mental justice office at the end fermenta protection agency when he was the epa administrator. i have every confidence that my comments will be weighed properly. thank you. >> thank you for your very constructive and appropriate words about our co-chairman. >> i am retired speaking as a citizen, but i was the executive director of the national response team for 10 years and was investigating the exxon valdez incident.

one matter for consideration would be to include in the public record the recommendations for the exxon valdez incident so that you consider the continuities that may come from that document through to the work you are doing. if you would consider that, i think perhaps it could be helpful. the national response team is made up of 16 federal agencies dealing with prepared this in response. after the major explosions in the 1990's, we tried to establish a prevention program of that, which would deal with professionals sitting around the table and developing reports, technical guidance, as well as sharing ideas on what could be done in prevention. we were not able to do that at that time for research purposes, but as you may know, the national response team played a fairly important role

in the beginning of the work on this particular incident. might idea is to consider including in the national response team, activities that deal with prevention and response. so that you have the technical work done in an easy manner. the last idea is to endorse the idea that was given to you coordinate the work that is being done with the chemical board. they developed a tremendous amount of respect in the last five years. and i am sure the work to do with them would be very valuable. i thank you for the opportunity to beshear. >> thank you for a very constructive suggestions. -- i thank you for the opportunity to be here. >> are there any other members of the public? is not -- if not --

>> i have a concluding comments. a remarkable beauty that i have come across. i think i will close by reading it. we have necessarily been preoccupied with issues of blame, responsibility and cause in such disasters, almost as if we were following the examples of 18th century sermons about the sea, assets catastrophe's could be responsible of evil or human actions or violation of deep principles of contemporary debate. such transgressions in my ability may well exist, but it is worth recalling their reason and preparation also have their limits. the oil spill might seem a completely man-made a mess, the result of some careless drilling, but the nature of the enterprise, daring the dangers of the deep, risking lives to fill elemental needs, is unthinkable without taking the powers and promise into account.

perhaps offshore drilling is a contemporary form of 19th century whaling. even an object of the qwest, there are times when the natural world was taken more seriously and was understood they can never be a way to completely eliminate hazards or fully control the seas there some powers -- such forceful powers. my wife sent me this. it is a part of an article of the musical composer. it is apparently part of the exhibits that is currently at the folger on the english and this see sea. based upon this, i will see it and recommended. thank you. >> any comments from members of

the commission? >> after that beautiful statement? [laughter] >> if there are no further comments, the meeting is adjourned. thank you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010]

>> if you missed any of this commission hearing on the oil spill in the gulf of mexico, we will show some of it in prime

time. that is at it o'clock eastern time here on c-span. c-span coverage of the investigation into the deepwater horizon explosion continues all this week, all they live on c- span2. key officials from bp, halliburton, and transocean are scheduled to testify before the interior department and president obama will be visiting new orleans on sunday to discuss the oil spill in the fifth anniversary of hurricane katrina. as a reminder, we have dozens of hours of video on this from congressional hearings to protests and town hall meetings. that is at c-span.org/oilspill. results are still coming in and at least one of the five states that hold primary elections yesterday. the gop senate race in alaska

between lisa murkowski and her challenger, john miller, is still not decided. you can check c-span.org /primarynight for the latest updates. now "washington journal." this is part of our week-long series examining defense issues. it is about 40 minutes. " continues. host: we're continuing our summer series, taking a topic and looking at it over five days. defense is our topic this week. on monday we look at the f-35 program grid tuesday we look at mine resistant ambush protected vehicles. today we consider the topic of drones, how they are used in their capabilities. joining us is, robert sova, who is with the u.s. army, the

capability manager of unmanned aircraft systems. thank you for joining us this morning. guest: thank you, pedro. good to be here. host: how often are these used as far as the army's dated eight uses? -- day-to-day uses? guest: wheat use small systems all the way up to the larger systems, great ego, and they are used on a daily basis -- grey eagle, and they are used on a daily basis. could you tell our audience how they are used? information gathering? what are their main uses? guest: the way the army employes unmanned aircraft systems is a variety -- certainly surveillance, security, command and control, sometimes used in

the attack role. as i said, a communications relay across the depth and breadth of the battlefield. it depends on the mission for the ground force commander that they are supporting. host: where are they used today? is it basically in iraq and afghanistan? are there other parts and the world -- in the world work is used? guest: obviously, they are used in iraq and afghanistan. there are other parts of the world they are used. they are organic acids to support the army's corp. -- structure -- or panic -- they are get assets to support the army's corps structure. host: how they replaced the use of human intelligence -- have that they replaced the use of human intelligence? how does that break down? guest: we talk about

reconnaissance, surveillance, target acquisitions, intelligence surveillance on a reconnaissance. what i mean by that is that certainly they are used in intelligence gathering to provide the commander with situational awareness and understanding. they provide the ability through the various sensors and payloads that they carry. host: as far as what they carry, what is the usual -- what does the usual vehicle carried as far as equipment and technology systems? guest: the predominant requirement in the ability is they provide a lot of full motion video, and that is provided through an infrared or electric optic sensors. that is usually in the form of a sense of all. that is predominantly what they carry. they also can carry munitions.

the only system in that particular system grey eagle is the only one that the army has armament on. all the others are collected in the form of electric optics or a synthetic aperture radar. host: so that is used every day. how many people does it take to operate one of these? guest: well, depending on the size of the unmanned aircraft system -- we call it a system because it is more than just the air vehicle. it is the ground control system that is operating the system. our small systems can be operated by a single operator. in the army, the backbone of the army is the non-commissioned officer, and the backbone of the unmanned aircraft system is the soldier. our largest system, grey eagle, has a formation of 128

personnel to provide stability is to six contiguous missions that threats 24 hours a day -- provides the capability to six contiguous missions the operates 24 hours a day. host: you will learn more about unmanned aerial vehicles during this time with the colonel, and you can call them up directly. send us e-mail and c- >> the inventory for the systems was a handful to a thousand aircraft by 2010. aircraft. 25,000 flight hours used last month. colonel, how much do these types

of systems cost? guest: you know, it is a variety, but the rough order of isnitude four grey eagle $180 million, and you're talking hundreds of thousands for the small systems. i want to clarify -- when we talk a system, it is not one air vehicle. you are talking to all their vehicles, six ground control station -- 12 air vehicles, six ground control stations, all of the equipment, including the soldiers who are part of the reformation. -- part of that formation. host: there were some concerns about people or other countries being able to pack the systems as far as getting access to the information -- able to hack the

systems as far as getting access to the information on these in vehicles. what is being done about it? guest: the army, as well as the defense department, had recognized the possibility early on with the use of unmanned aircraft systems. we had been on the road back to a group what we use -- roadmap to encrypt what we use. the downlink of the information coming off -- that is the direction we are going. we are on the road to do that with all our systems, small and large. host: our guest is a graduate of syracuse university, and he has a master's in the strategic studies at the u.s. army war

college. colonel robert sova, joining us to talk about unmanned aerial vehicles. greensburg, and will be out, republican line, you were first out. -- greensburg, pennsylvania, republican line. caller: i do not believe you have to answer all of his questions. why do we have to tell them everything? you don't have to tell them anything. let them read the book if you want to. guest: well, ma'am, i appreciate the call, and it is important that we let the public know as to the utilization of the systems and getting the word out on this. we have great american soldiers operating these systems and supporting our country. i appreciate that, i thank you

for your call. host: des moines, iowa, john on the democrats' line. caller: suggesting that the greater the use of the drones that we here are so successful is increasing the negative image of the american soldier. i guess we are trying to become more approachable and more friendly in this process. evidently, drones are going in the opposite direction. can you help me with this? guest: if i understand the question, certainly i, too, have read the use of drones and the impersonality of the use of robotics -- i will not speculate or comment on that. what i will say that is that through the use of unmanned

aircraft systems, it gives the capability to have the pu ersistance -- that is what these systems do, where you can have a platform that stands up for 24 hours of operation, you remove the soldier from the immediate risk of -- we firmly believe that if you allow machines to do what machines to best -- obviously, we're not talking about completely replacing the soldier, because you needed the cognitive thinking on the battlefield. it provides commanders at the technical level with the support and the awareness and understanding to make decisions that are necessary. host: it is important to understand, i guess, maybe for the audience, the difference between a drone and unmanned aerial vehicle. guest: good question, pedro.

you hear the term drone, unmanned aerial field goal, also, remotely piloted vehicle. drones are for targeting towed behind aircraft that are not operated from remote locations. the army, as i said, it uses the term unmanned aircraft systems because it is a system of systems. the platform is just one aspect of the unmanned aircraft system. host: san diego, lisa, independent line. caller: the reason i'm calling this be talking about drones and unmanned vehicles, but weren't they called predator drones at one time, and isn't a predator sort of like a terrorist? these are on man. this sort of cowardly.

-- these are unmanned. it is sort of cowardly. there was no intelligence needed to use these drones. guest: thank you for your call. it just to clarify, "predator" is a term and name for the air force unmanned aircraft system, or as they're calling it now, remotely piloted vehicle. the equivalent to what the air force predator system is -- as i said, the army has a system called "grey eagle," and it was recently given that, net name. what we call a common name for the army's version of the predator is grey eagle. host: it costs about $20

million, it has a satellite link, speed of about a 4 mi. per hour, range of about 71 -- are some neat speed of about -- 84 miles per hour, range of up to 770 miles per hour. next call. caller: the coast guard uses drones for protection. a lot of people use the equipment to save lives. [unintelligible] i thank them all for saving lives. host: next call is glendale, arizona. barbara, independent line. caller: i would like to ask the colonel question. he mentioned the military flying

these unmanned vehicles. can you speak about the independent contractors that are over there? i know that in iraq and they pulled the troops out that are there to protect the people. what happens when these independent contractors go over there? are they safe? can you speak on the independent contractors? i would like to hold on the line to hear what you have to say. guest: no, that is a great question. certainly with the utilization of the systems we have, we have a couple of different things. we have what we call contract- owned, contract-operated, in support of the military. we have contact logistics and support of the military, an hour of the systems that provide us with the expertise and technical support. and we have the government-owned systems contacted and operated.

i visited numerous sites and continue to do so in both the theaters. contract operators operate right alongside our military operators. it is a great team effort and we will continue to do that effort. we have done that both prior to the downsizing in iraq and also with the buildup in afghanistan we will continue that mode of operations. host: if a contractor is operating one of these in vehicles, is there a military person attached overseeing it? guest: as we do -- there is a military person in this their narro -- in this scenario i mentioned, there is a military leader on the side supporting the operation. host: austin, texas, martha, democrats' line.

caller: the other day it another military man referred to future wars. this war mentality is just crazy. we were warned to be where the military industrial complex by every president rid -- beware the military industrial complex by a great president. can't you find another job? all we're doing is waging wars to kill people for profit. i find that horrible. guest: ma'am, i appreciate your opinion. obviously, i chose to serve in defense of the country. thank you for your call. host: on their perceptions that the army talks about as far as how the -- is programsare th -- are there perceptions that our meat talks about as far as how the programs are perceived by the general public? guest: certainly they had a

military application of the army is using them for. as we continue to pursue the technology and these uses -- for example, they have been used in wildfires to help in identifying where the wild fires are spread. i cannot speak to specifics because i'm not expert in that area. they have been used in flooding situations. we work in conjunction with the federal aviation administration for access to the national airspace, greater access, to support these types of operations. they have a significant roles in the missions as they play. again, i cannot speak to the specifics of how they would be used. but they have the application in the future. besides the military application. host: is the faa has a tent about offering air space to these systems --? is -- is the faa hesitant about

offering our space to these systems? guest: i am not an expert, have aut they responsibility of a first do no harm. we will continue to work with them. the of the numerous tests and we will continue to do that a -- has been -- we have done numerous tests and we will continue to do that as we go forward. over 60% of our graduates that operate unmanned aircraft systems in the army come from the national guard units. we have shadow-type systems in the individual state. just like other military assets with the national guard, they can be used by the states and governors in that role as well.

host: one of the discussions about this is along the lines of the southern border using these systems. is that correct? guest: there have been several requests in border, northern and southern, by states to utilize the assets. i cannot speak to the specifics of the utilization, but they're certainly a request buy states to use the assets. host: new york state, republican line. caller: i have no problem with these unmanned aircraft and all that, although they are extremely expensive. my question is that as we go and are gathering intelligence in iraq or afghanistan, it is a really hairy kind of situation. some of these people don't mean us harm. some of them and do.

at the top of a dime they can basically blend in with the background. they know their territory, they know how to put the gun down and walk around like a normal civilian. how in the world are we ever going to know that this war has come to an end, first of all? second of all, it is kind of like if we americans really did not want them to be able to come over to our country and do us harm, then we could prevent them from getting tickets to our country, we could prevent them from getting over by the sea. i know that they have an awful situation going on in there, they have horrible people who would come over and rape and pillage and just make our lives miserable. it is good that we went over there and established what we have, we are in such debt in

this country and we have drones getting smuggled into this country -- host: okay, we will leave it there. colonel, is there anything you want to answer? guest: i have talked to the use -- the scenarios of the unmanned aircraft systems and how they can provide the commander on the ground organic support. they can have information as to what is going on in their area of operation without putting, unduly putting, soldiers at risk. that is the usefulness of the platform, providing that situational awareness, because the situations are unpredictable. i will leave it there. host: someone on twitter wants to ask the colonel --

guest: again, in my previous comments, i started to allude to that. as i said, there are multiple uses. another scenario -- as we drawdown, forces in iraq -- as we draw down combat forces in iraq, more and more we are using these systems for communication extension. as we have farther distances between our force structure, we have communication packages on the platforms that allow the forces to communicate across the depth and width of the battlefield. again, there is multiple uses that the platforms can be used for. that is just one given scenario. host: when it comes to pakistan, is any information-gathering being unconnected with the flooding going on down there? -- being connected with the flooding going on down there? guest: i cannot talk to that.

i am not aware of that. host: next call. caller: colonel, i would like to salute you and commend the men and women in this unmanned system, which gives the united states great ability to read the woman who called and mentioned being cowardly -- the job of the military is to protect men and women of this country and our interests all over the world. the unmanned aircraft the system gives us the capability that can take the enemy out in a blank and distinguished who is the enemy and it was not. that gives us a great advantage and protect the lives of our men and women. thank you, sir, you are doing a great job and we appreciate it. guest: that you for your call. thank you. host: san diego, california, paul, go ahead. caller: i was going to say the

same thing about a woman who called you cowardly. the guy took the words out of my mouth. in san diego, we are so proud. iran just came out and asked -- announced they have are predator that they just developed bef oped for anlped fo unmanned vehicle. guest: they're obviously of the countries other developing unmanned systems. thank you for your comment about general atomics. as i said earlier, the army version of that is the gre ey eagle and that

particular company creates the grey eagle as well. host: compare the use of drones by this president to that of president bush. guest: i don't know if there is a comparison. it is the military leaders using an enabling tool they have, and the techniques and procedures we are continuously learning from our soldiers, employing these assets to support the commander. those roles and missions and functions come from the use of the military leadership. host: forgive me, what i meant is the amount of the use of these systems. is it more under this administration and that the previous one? -- than the previous one? guest: i cannot speculate that we are using the systems more. the overall use certainly is increasing.

as you identify, in april we went over 1 million hours for one particular system that the army has in its inventory called the shadow. that system itself as got over 500,000 hours. over 90% of those total hours have been flown in combat situations. the overall use of the unmanned aircraft systems continues to increase. host: how often do these drones and plans need to be refurbished? guest: the army's plan is to try to reset these assets every three years. when we say "reset," when i unit comes out of the year, we reset and do the standard me to -- when a unit comes out of the

theater, we reset and do the standard maintenance. host: montgomery, albama, democrats' line -- montgomery, alabama, democrats' line. caller: colonel, once again, i want to apologize for those people who try to get political. i am a retired military, and you're just doing the job that you are trying to do. the unmanned project is a great project, saving lives. my question was already answered, but what you see is the future of the unmanned project? will it spread out further and would not have any unmanned vehicles in combat? guest: thank you. it is a good question to lead into talking about recently, the army has published the unmanned

aircraft systems road map. the center of excellence is in alabama. it talks about the way ahead from now until 2035 as we look at the future of the use. the army's vision and direction with the unmanned aircraft system is not a replacement of manned aircraft. what we see is this energy and use of the aircraft systems doing unmanned operations providing for greater capability in saving lives. we will continue to figure out what that balance is and take advantage of the technologies being developed. host: of you were off of twitter asked a specific question -- a viewer off of twitter asked a

specific question . guest: there is categorization determined by the joint center of excellence, and we talk about the group won -- group one as 20 pounds or below. there is the element in -- there is development looking at systems, the smallest hummingbirds and less. not familiar with any use of the true microsize, but we are using systems that are less than 1.5 towns. our smallest system right now is the raven, less than five pounds. we are doing a system that is

part of the 1.5-to-two-pound size. we are operating that now in afghanistan. host: what would be the use of that size? guest: the size of that system and what we're looking at is the concept -- it is what we call a family of smalls, a system that is able to fly 45 minutes to an hour, up to a system that is able to fly approximately three hours. the rate is about 1 hour 45 minutes to two hours. what it does is that it gives the capability to possibly get out of harm's way if they are operating in an urban environment or area, to maneuver their forces over the next whole line or building. it provides them the

flexibility and capability to do that without utilizing one of our larger systems, the shadow or the great ego. y eagle. host: iowa. caller: i'm wondering if we are operating in iran and also monitoring the situation in israel and the gaza strip. and isn't it the u.n. telling us where we can fly and what kind of information we can gather when it comes to going to war? they have a say on whether you can go to war or not based on your intelligence at the time? guest: i cannot talk to all of your question. i can tell you that, obviously, with our central command leadership and rules of engagement, the use of our capabilities and assets are governed by our military

leaders, and obviously, we abide by those rules of engagement and use depending on the areas of operation that we are operating in. host: next call for the colonel is in new jersey, independent line. caller: good morning, sir. can you hear me? host: go ahead, you are on. caller: thanks for taking all of the political calls that have been coming in. i'm what is called a shuttle driver. i fly one of these planes. i love doing it. a lot of these people don't understand -- the thing that we have weapons on these aircraft --. they think that we have weapons on these aircraft. we do surveillance. we are not only saving lives of guys on the ground, but maybe of somebody in the air.

maybe you might want to elaborate on that, sir. thank you for your time -- host: before you leave, what is your training like before you can fly one of these systems? caller: i don't know, colonel, if you can elaborate on what the training is. we have to go through the same faa board that a private pilot has to take we have to know about avionics and aviation. i do not know how much more i can elaborate on that, colonel, without crossing the line. guest: no, thanks, and thanks for what you do. as he mentioned, he is an operator of the shadow, which is what we term a lot as the work force of our force -- workhorse of our force. he is exactly right. you hear a lot of the discussion about the legal aspect or the use of weapons systems -- the

lethal aspect or the use of weapons systems on these platforms. grey eagle is the only system the army has that is what a nice. and it provides a kid -- ability -- grey eagle is the only system the army has that is weaponized. and it provides an important ability. it is just an additional na blowback and -- just an additional enabler and to get in the army inventory. talking to the point mentioned about training, i will give you anywhere from 3 to four months to less than a year. one specific example -- at a recent visit the theater -- to

theater, i met a young pfc doing a fantastic job operating the system, and was february when i was talking to her. she had graduated high school in late may and had deployed in november, operating the shuttle system -- the shadow system, had accumulated over 500 hours. far less expensive to trade one of our operators, far less than the -- to train one of our operators, for less than the total cost of the system, but providing outstanding capability. host: greg in connecticut. caller: it is a drag from new haven, connecticut. -- i am a u.s.g -- greg from new haven, connecticut. i am a u.s. army veteran.

whatever you want to do, you do. i respect the results to also, i don't like the people that call and try to put you down, sir. i have a son that his servant, i have a nephew that is sort -- i have a son that is serving, i happen if you that is serving. i respect you. you keep the job going. guest: that you, greg. i will pass on the thanks and -- thank you, greg. i will pass on the bankthanks ad pride. it is ok. we support this great country and listen to all sides. host: colonel, what brings you to denver? guest: one of our organizations,

unmanned systems and vehicles in international, have their annual convention here. i am here to determine if there are any capabilities that could enhance our current systems, working with our project manager out of alabama, looking at the various systems. host: what other countries use these types of systems? guest: unmanned aircraft systems? as the caller said, there is a variety of systems -- variety of countries out there -- israel has great technologies with their systems. we work with the coalition countries. the united kingdom has great capabilities. we work with the various countries of those capabilities -- work with the various countries and look at those capabilities.

host: republican line, of memphis, tennessee. caller: colonel, how are you doing this morning, sir? guest: good. caller: i want to tell you that by no means are you a coward and none of my brothers and sisters in the military are cowards. that is addressed to the lady that made the comment earlier. further, the individual who said that we have all these problems with drugs in the united states, he needs to go out and check the statistics that the majority of the drugs, especially heroin, comes from afghanistan, and a predator can be a useful tool for us. thank you very much, again, i really do appreciate it. guest: no, thank you for your call. certainly there are multiple uses for the platform. we can use all our systems. we are just now figuring out all

the military utility. as i mentioned, certainly, they save lives and equipment and provide commanders with the information they need, and as i mentioned earlier, as we continue to work with the fha -- faa, i'm sure there will provide outstanding to the ability for domestic use -- they will provide outstanding capability for domestic use. host: one more call. caller: hello, can you hear me? host: caller, you are on, go ahead. caller: i am glad you mentioned domestic use. i believe that the ultimate use of these predator drones unmanned vehicles is to spy on americans who are critical of the government and to attack

america, not the foreign devils. that is why you are trying this out that is so innocent and -- thisrottin -- >>trotting out that is so innocent and nice. alex and jones has blown the lid off of this. he shows us a video game where the bad guys that you were supposed to kill and the video game are american patriots and militia members that are standing up for freedom. the good guys that kiddies in america are supposed to be -- united nations forces. one man is still in jail for refusing to wear a blue helmet for the united nations. host: okay, we believe that there. colonel, if you want to respond. guest: no, that is ok.

all pawns on the chessboard playing our parts in a drama that is not their station or non important. >> i want to personally express again my sincere regret about the encounter with a capitol hill police. >> i cannot walk away and had you guys doing your campaign because i am annoying. >> current and former members of delivering apologies and explanations directly to their colleagues on the floor house. watch more online and read about them at the c-span video library, all searchable and free. it is washington your way. >> the c-span networks -- providing coverage of politics, public affairs, nonfiction books, and american history. it is all available to you on television, radio, online, and on social networking sites.

view our content anytime at the c-span video library. we take you on the road with our digital content bus. it is washington your way. the c-span networks -- now available in more than 100 million homes, created by cable, provided as a public service. >> the state department today did not disclose any details about former president jimmy carter's trip to north korea. his main goal is to secure the release of an american teacher who was arrested after crossing the border in january. this is 30 minutes. >> welcome to the heritage foundation. it is my privilege to welcome you to our auditorium and welcome those who join us on our web site and joining us today through c-span. we would ask everyone else in

the house to make sure your cellphones have been turned off as a courtesy to presenters. we will oppose the program within 24 hours on the heritage website for everyone in the future. hosting this is the person who put together the symposium for this week. we appreciate her work and that as well. she serves as policy analyst. she was a research assistant for the hutchinson group or she previously worked as an environmental management consultant as well as the staff assistant for robert ehrlich. please join me in welcoming jenna. >> good morning and welcome today's homeland security 2020 symposium. we're going to talk about working with the private sector.

we'll learn from the attacks on 911 the importance and the vital role that we can play. and also the need to have strong relationships with the private sector. there is a statistic quoted around that 85% of critical infrastructure is owned by the private sector. and much of that is true in the dumb -- in the private demand. it's critical that private protection efforts helped keep the economy going strong. we have to panelists today that are giving us their idea of what the future of critical infrastructure should look like. their distinguished people. let me introduce them to you.

she was the principal staff liaison in the administration. jessica has served as a senior counsel at the computer crimes and intelligence property section. she focused on technology issues and let the section cyber crime investigation team. it is such an issue you can have a whole section on that, which we will later this week. she worked in washington where she practiced communications, media, and intellectual property law. she has taught as an adjunct professor and that the military -- american military university. she is currently a senior fellow at the george washington university policy institute. she is active in the hispanic community and she is -- she has been listed three times as one

of the most influential and hispanics in the united states. please join me in welcoming her. >> as we talk about the future, it's important to see how we got to where we are today. it was not created on 9/11. it predates that several years, if not decades. fairest federal government initiative in critical infrastructure protection came in 1996. it was after the oklahoma city bombing. there was the creation of a critical infrastructure bread to see how better we can protect ourselves. from that working group, president clinton created a commission on critical

infrastructure protection to look at the issues and come up with a report and recommendations on what we need to be doing, how do we engage the private sector, and what should be out there. in 1997, it issued its report. if it took a very different take. even though it came out of the oklahoma city bombing, it focused more on cyber security. so getting into, where does cyber security and and began which is becoming a big issue. we saw that in something i will talk about in a minute. that was the question -- how should would be focusing on critical and destruction or to mark to we talk about physical or cyber? what does it mean? from that recommendation came the presidential best corrective -- directive which looked at critical infrastructure protection in

terms of piper's sector -- private-sector partnerships. he created several entities within the federal government and a few others that have all kinds of interesting names. that popped up and we love that have acronyms and the federal government. interestingly, those all dealt with cyber security. does eventually became part of the department of homeland security, and some sections did not go over from the original agencies, but they are now part of the network. there is a less of a focus on physical. this is one of the first questions we ask ourselves when we looked at his st. -- had we differentiate between cyprus security on the internet and the physical area?

-- cyber security on the internet and the physical area? i would say that was part of this effort and thought we should distinguish between them. the areas we need to be looking at on the physical side are very different than on the cyber security side. the expertise needed to be securing our chemicals plants is different from securing an it facility. at the same time, sadr security is integrated into all the physical elements, chemical security plans, the smart bread, all these things have cyber elements. to theeen going back early -- mid-1990s, and how you take something that is integrated into the physical and separate it out of still addressing the physical challenges? as we go forward, that is something we have to tackle.

one of the big challenges which i will talk about more when we talk about the different agencies cast with critical of the structure protection is that you have agencies which have responsibilities on the physical side of things. what has happened over time is that the department was created under the homeland security act. it laid out sector-specific agencies which would was gone to different areas. -- which would respond to different areas. areas it's responsible for, transportation has the transportati sector. just because those have specific responsibilities, you know, who better to deal with the transportation sector than the department of transportation which deals with them on a daily basis i think was a lot of the reasoning behind that. now, the problem becomes, however, is when you -- while these agencies need to deal with

the various types of sectors, security is not necessarily first and foremost. they're dealing with transportation entities on a wide variety of things, so how do you make that transfer over to have an agency that's not responsible per se for security make security a viable function. and it talks about security really talking about resiliency protection efforts. that's not a priority necessarily for a lot of the different agencies. they have a lot of priorities, it's one of many, and how do you transfer that over? i think that's been a struggle as we look at the critical infrastructure space is what do you do about that? and it transferover when you look at the cybersecurity space, as well. so one of the questions now is we have -- there are 18 sector specific sectors out there. there's been a lot of work done on all of them. nine have information on -- nine have been made public so you can

actually see what's happening. the other minot so public. just because of sensitivities. and we need to look to the future again, look at the agency, see what their priorities are. if you look at budgets there aren't -- security is no high on a lot of agency's budgets that have specific sectors that they're looking at. the department of homeland security obviously has a coordinating role that's evolved over time but how much authority does it have over sectors when it doesn't deal with it daily? and we are going to have to look at how we deal with that and what we need to be doing going forward? should the department take a larger role? should we just leave it to the various agencies to deal with? how do you get two agencies to work together where one has a specific mission and others don't as they work for different sectors? what does that mean for the private sector? if you're a company in a private sector and have to deal with two different agencies and has these added thoughts and

responsibilities in dealing with them, that's a struggle and i think that's's something we're watching closely. i think the other thing that we'll see going forward is if you go back even to the '90s we looked at critical infrastructure protection as a national iue. oklahoma city bombing is a national issue. we're going to take a national approach, a federal government approach to dealing with critical infrastructure protection. what we've seen evolve over time, though, it's not that simple. it's sector specific, so now we have all these different sectors but it's regionally specific. within industry, certain industries have certain responsibilities and certain regional issues that come up. they may not be acrosshe board so when you deal with an owner and operator of a chemical facility and the gulf of mexico it's going to be very different than if you're dealing with the same types of owners and operators of another coast or internal to the united states

somewhere. so i think as we go forward we are going to look to see more of a regionalized model on critical infrasucture protection so it will be sector specific and regionalized. the good thing about taking that model or we should at least is that you're more likely to pick up some of the smaller businesses and middle-size businesses, one of the things it's been missing in the critical infrastructure front. when you look at it on a nationalized level and federal government level you get the big companies dealing with specific sectors but you're not going to necessarily pick up the little guys who are out in whatever city, town you nt to talk about because they're not going to have the resources to come and ten minutes here in d.c. and spend a lot of money to join isacs or sector coordinating councils, so regionalized approach would allow more companies to take -- become involved and take an active role in protecting critical infrastructure. i think the other thing we're going to see in really think about and or need to be thinking

about is what do you do about risk? we haven't really looked at risk thoroughly i think in the critical infrastructure space. it's been talked about especially more so in recent years, but it's not necessarily been baked into some of the plans and how you deal with the private sector. a lot of times we take aore reactionary role butook at what's happened and react and that has an adverse effect on the private sector so going forward how do build more risk programs and risk management issues into critical infrastructure protection is going to be critical. i think -- i'll end on this, the biggest question for the federal government is how do we move from emphasizing protection which i think we've done to more of a resiliency model? that is, we focused on deterring threats an mitigating consequences once disasters and attacks happen, sort of the reactionary approach and what do we do to move or to a resiliency

approach? how do we resist/absorb or adapt to a recover from disasters and attacks and how do we become more flexible so that when something like what's happened with bp and the gulf of mexico occur we're able to respond more quickly so we're not kind of caught shocked because we've been focusing too much on protection and i think that is going to be the biggest theme and issue of goi forward as we look at critical infrastructure protection and how we're going to merge the private sector, the various agencies and the various state and local entities, as well into it. i didn't even touch upon that because i'm mostly focusing on the private sector but that is to consider well. >> i'll introduce you to alan windsor former adviser at homeland security and consultant on planning and policy issues. for the last two years mr. windsor has been working with private and public sector clients. uae where he led a project to

develop the emirates first strategy and coastal management efforts. prior to his work in abu dhabi he served in the u.s. department of homeland security as a policy adviser this both the office of the deputy secretary and the policy directorate. as the coordinator for the dhs work group on countering violent extremism he worked closely with u.s. agencies and international partners to integrate counterterrorism approaches and policies. mr. winder has worked on domestic counterterrorism issues for the homeland security institute and earned his b.s. from james madison university and holds a masters of puic administration from the university of north carolina, chapel hill. please join me in welcoming alan windsor. [ applause ] >> thank you very much. i really appreciate the opportunity to come in and be a part of this today. i think th is an exciting opportunity and exciting week of panels to look at emerging

issues over the next ten years to look at homeland security 2020 and what are the major challenges out there and the trends in particular issues. i think that the private sector subject is particularly interesting because i think that there is an increasing need to find those for the private sector. to plug in to the critical infrastructure protection domain and the homeland security field in a water sense. as jena said i've worked as a consultant in abu dhabi where i advised them on critical infrastructure strategy and policy issues. really working with a lot of clients not only to develop the risk assessments that were going to look at their critical infrastructure areas but also formulate the policies and strategies that would address those concerns. and it was really a lot of fun to work with clients in an emerging economy because in many

ways the slate is completely blank. as they build new airport, seaports, water and sewer systems, i.t. infrastructure they not only have the opportunity to build security into the system from the design phase of a particular project but have the opportunity to shape policies and regulations and procedures in an environment that's relatively new. you know, obvisly abu dhabi is a fundamentally different operating environment than the united states as opposed to the u.s. where, you know, the magical number, 85% of t nation's critical infrastructure is owned and operated by the private sector. most of the major industries in the emirate, oil and gas, telecommunications and others are government owned. at least majority owned. and i thought -- my team thought that would be the biggest advantage we had going in and helping the emirateies build their system. the reality turned out to be

different. industry players in the uae were ju as concerned about maintaining a proper balance between efficiency as u.s. counterparts and it turned out the end that they shared a number of similar ncerns as the ones we faced in united states as to share actionable and timely information between government and private sector partners, how to effectively screen workers, working in critical industries and how to properly assess threats and develop an acceptable appetite for risk in particular industries. and many other issues. one of the things i noticed over and over was their desire for best practices from the united states. it's something i also noticed if my discussions with people in places like indi even as these emerging economies build some of the most sophisticated critical infrastructure just infrastructure systems in the world they're looking to the united states for leadership in the field of critical infrastructure protection.

emergency management and some other areas and in a world that's increasingly interconnected we have to take that kind of leadership in this field very seously. with tighter supply chains and an economy that's increasingly dependent on foreign trade for critical assets, the security of foreign critical infrastructure will be increasingly important d one of the best ways we can ensure the security of that foreign infrastructure is to develop the kinds of best practices here in the united states tt others want to adapt to their own systems. so that's what i'd like to briefly talk a little bit about today is two areas that i think will not only be vil to improving our own infrastructure protection in the u.s., but will also ensure our continued leadership on the issue around the world. you know, the first concept i'd really like to talk to and we talked a little about its the concept of resiliency. it's a concept that's really

caught on around the world not only in the area of critical infrastructure protection but other various areas. i remember when i was at dhs and, you know, we were pushing this concept in its initial stage, there were some initial pushback and people really, really saw resilience as another word for redundancy and i think fortunately the understanding of the concept has pa tured over time as most people are beginning to think of vulnerabilities and criticalities in terms of a systems approach to risk management. but i still think that there's a next evolution of the concept. when we talk about resiliency, most folks are still focused on the ability of a particular system to operate or rebound after an event. and ase look into the next ten years to 2020 i think the concept will inevitably broaden quite a bit. to focus on the ability of an economy to operate or rebound after an event.

and the only way you can really identify assets and nodes critical to resilient economy is to systematically assess threat t s and risks and address them. risk assessment has come a long way the last couple of years. the national infrastructure plan, the n.i.p. is a great example with methodologies for assessing them increasingly. risk management should be our number one tool for prioritizing assets for protection. in an age of increasingly scarce homeland security dollar, i'm glad to see we're moving in the direction of comparing apples to apples when it comes to allocating resources. now, i'm not advocating se sort of nationwide econom assessment to guide homeland security dollars. i think the qhsr gets to that issue to a slight extent. when we're talking about the next evolution of resiliency, i think the bulk of the work may

be done at the regional and local level. state and local governments are really best positioned to determine which elements of local economies are most critical. and they're also best positioned to work with private sector actors to develop solutions to the protection of critical assets. you may have a locality that is particularly dependent on the tourism and business trade, for example. locality that prioritizes hotel security as a high priority. those localities can work with developers to institute design standards through local planning authorities to deter or mitigate incidents at those particular types of facilities. you may have another locality that may want to focus on iconic structures or particular nodes in local transportation system. in any case, local and privat sector actors are going to be best positioned to assess

vulnerabilities in particular economic consequences and federal authorities should be in a position to sist those localities with threat information to guide risk assessments and resource allocaon. now, none of this is to say we shouldn't continue to focus on protection and resiliency of critical assets nationwide. far from it. we need to continue to ensure our transportation networks, our distribution networks and otr critical elements of our economy remain secure. but the next evolution of resiliency should include a parallel focus, parallel process focused at the local level. on those assets most critical to a local economy. a process that allows effective private sector input and allows local planning authorities and other local bodies to institute appropriate regulations to mitigate against risks and that process should be supported and guided by the federal government. another area i think will

inevitably mature over the coming ten years is the area of information sharing. this wouldn't be a homeland security conversation if we weren't talking about information sharing in some way, shape or form. one of the major issues in that domain is sharing timely information among partners and encourage them to share information with the public sector. now, i'm not going to go into many obstacles associated with intel and information sharing. i think they've been beat to date but i will say that homeland security and other agencies are doing some really good work to ensure that proprietary and business sensitive information isn't being shared inappropriately and i think that that process will mature as industry and government arcs develop trust over time. the major issue that i've seen over the last couple of years is what do you do with the information once you have it.

state and local authorities have really struggled with this question as more and more information is pushed to them about threats and situations through fusion centers and other mechanisms and a number of private sector actors have also told me about their struggle to integrate, you know, threat information into continuity planning. the real -- this is a real target of opportunity. most of the industries we consider critical, oil and gas sector, the transportation sector and so on have very mature health safety and environmental programs, hse programs. they're a result of measures to not only protect employees and meet regulatory requiremts but so as a means of risk mitigation. you know, obviously the deepwater horizon incident in the gulf of mexico was an obvious exception, but a number of hse programs are actually quite well developed and mature. a number of industries use hse programs to exercise against

particular incidents and the standard operating procedures associated with these programs are the perfect venue for exercising what to do when threat information i passed from authorities to private sector actors. you know, just as in most response scenario, the actions associated with a response to an incident will be fairly consistent regardless of what caused the incident itself. however, awareness and heightened vigilance as a result of information shared with a particular industry may prevent an incident and these are the kinds situations that should be considered industry best practices for responding to fferent types of threat information. hse programs are also an excellent venue for encouraging the reporting of suspicious and behavior and activity through the system to authorities. one of the goals that i know that we want to encourage. so as we move in the next ten years i thk this is one area of coordination between public

and private sector partners that can truly serve as a best practice for our international partners and could really improve the ability of our own industries to respond to aconable and timely information. but could also serve as an example to our friends. and as we continue to think about ways to share information, we also need to make sure everyone knows how to use it appropriately. i could go on and on with issues that are in the critical infrastructure domain. these are just two, but given my experiences working in critical infrastructure overseas for the last couple of yees these were two issues i thought were particularly important, both as coepts to ensure the protection of our own industries and as a means of maintaining our leadership in the developmt of best practices for our economic partners around the world. i appreciate the opportunity to be here. this is fun.

>> thanks. so we're going to go ahead and take some questions. if you can raise your hand and please state your name and affiliation and wait for the microphone, that would be great. so we'll take the lady in the purple. >> my question is regarding a chinese company -- it's called wawate technology. to supply nextel with the telecommunication equipment. and it has raised some concerns from some senators f national security reason because the alleged dealings between this company and iran -- i just wonder what is your thoughts on that and then do you think sometimes when the commercial deal is on the way, politians

are attacking the national security reasons too far sort of lzr back a few years ago, and that situation became fairly politicized. i worked in the united arab emirates for a few years, and i think that as we look at situations like that and evaluate the criticality to our economy and various foreign enemies -- entities, we need to assess the risk and not just one

based upon the political posturing that sometimes happens in this town. political posturing that sometimes happens in this town. >> i would agree with that. having in my previous life when i was at the department of justice we dealt a lot with some of the foreign investment issues and foreign partnership issues in the telecom and internet space and i thin it's a very complicated issue and looking at a specific transaction it's hard to say in a vacuum this is good or bad just because there are a lot of security ncerns, some things that a lot of us in this room probably would have no idea about because it may be on the classified side of things as well as law enforcement issues that have to be addressed, without knowing all those details it's hard to say what specific item is good or bad. but it is a complicated issue however, we do need to make sure as weigh mentioned we don't

politicize things and take a comprehensive approach to security elements as comprehensively as possible. >> please. >> i have two questions, one for jessica and one for alan. jessica, i wanted to know if there is any relationship between risk management and residency and mr. alan, can you comment plus about the evolution of the concept of residency when you talk about assets. thank you. >> yes, there is a relationship between risk management and resiliency. part of resiliency at least the

way i look at it is the resisting attacks or disters and how do you build in some type of mechanisms to prevent and resist that? and i think the risk part of that -- risk management part of that is critical in building an approach to things. that's the short answer to your question. >> i think a few years ago as the evolution of thought -- homeland security, as a field it is reaching its maturity over the last five years. people thinking about it more thoroughly. the concept of resiliency came when people started to think from a systems assessment point of view in homeland security.

that was a very important concept, because up until then there had been a real focus on prevention and protection with an acknowledgment you cannot prevent everything. how do you approach an industry to make sure if there is an incident that you are able to rebound from that in an efficient way. there needs to be that next debt. right now we think of things in terms of critical infrastructure. there are also critical assets. there are key assets that falwell work on the list. you cannot identify what those assets are unless you are doing

an analysis of risk at the regional level him. what might be a critical asset to one locality might not be to another. it takes a thorough analysis of assets in securing a local economy to mature that resilience. that is where we are headed next. >> [inaudible] >> please wait for the microphone. >> [unintelligible] >> perhaps you are talking about the layers of how you define critical assets. i think there is critical

infrastructure and key assets. a place that is leading the way is the abu dhabi. they are thoroughly creating asset registry of what are they critical infrastructure assets? what are the critical assets to the local economy? things that are important to their tourism industry. what are the key assets in terms of local buildings that house i.t. infrastructure. if they were compromised, it would affect the local economy. those are the different definitions of infrastructure assets that are out there.

>> the gentleman over here. >> i would like to follow up on your comments. : back to 85% that is privately held , as you go into the 17 categories and these responsibilities across different agencies, what is the mechanism for establishing standards for capability to respond with brazilian saying. -- respond with resiliency? what can be done to drive a -- drive private sector investment in establishing that capacity for protection? >> i think we need to him -- as we look to integrate threat

confirmation, the information we are pushing down, we also need a process of incentivizing procedures that will deal with those. i am not certain we have reached a point where we can come up with a thorough system of how you do that. it needs to be an incentive process, not a regulatory process. that is where we need significant private sector input into how that process would work. the first part of your question -- >> you almost get the sense that we bypass protection.

we never really established standards which we could assess. >> i don't want to give the impression that we should sell short the protection side of things. in the first few years we were focused on the [unintelligible] i think that as we identify key industries with local leaders we will have to identify what the risk thresholds are. we will have to identify procedures that address those risks. one example that stands out is hotel security. there is a spike in a tax cut

over the last 10 years because they are iconic structures and attract western audiences. how do you go about securing those? one way to do is to have a big fortress of around it. if you go to india after the attacks you will see they have taken that approach. we should be taking a much more integrated approach where we are asking the private sector what are your concerns? what are the impacts losing a major hotel facility would have and developing the minimum procedures we would want, be it smart lun this -- smart lobbies.

minimum of sense from the street. these are the kinds of regulatory approach as local government is better at integrating into its local planning process. what the consequences would be if they lost? taken the government side and it looking at how to tie it together. that is an example how it could work. >> have to look at the local side of things -- we will have to balance giving authority to the local entities is important, but when we were trying to do database is you have to be careful about that. we have all heard the stories of

a popcorn factor. -- popcorn factory. looking at protection may not be the case, but that is something we will be tackling. you want to defer to the local entities who have control of their regional areas and balance it for more national interests. upheaval -- >> i represent federal management agency. i appreciate the perspective that we need to do more at the state and local levels. despite the best efforts of the private sector, most states don't have a dedicated program. while some do it craig like

washington and louisiana, most have nothing. -- while some do great. we have to have a great program for private sector engagement. how do we get there? >> you are completely right. part of that is looking at a more regionalized approach. moving more towards that model, that will be important because of federal assets. it is easier to help the state and local entities. it would be easier to help them along van taking it from a d.c. perspective. it is more providing resources at the local level as opposed to getting grants.

and really institutionalizing it. that will be the most critical step, regionalizing the government's efforts. efforts. >> is there more questions? actually i wondered if i could ask you all a question. you know, it seems to me we talk a lot about, you know, the problems in the private sector in terms of security and what often -- and you can see if you disagree with the statement and also, you know, tell me what you think could be done about it. it seems to me we oftentimes forget the desire of the private sector to be secure and that oftentimes that message is lost, at there is an economic interest, you know, there's a real interest at the private sectorto keep their facility secure to have their own robust critical infrastructure protection. i just wonder if you ght say whether you agree, whether dhs

understands that adequately and how we might best be able to interweave that notion into protection policies. >> you go first. >> yeah, i agree with what you're saying, you know, of course, everybody wants to be secure. it helps business continuity. it increases stability, you know, one of the -- one of the fundamental concepts of economic development is that economic development, investment follows a couple different things, that it follows education, you know, folks who have, you know, go no a place where folks have the educational capacity to do a particular kind of job, and it follows infrastructure. the ability to effectively and efficiently get a market or a good tool market. i think as we move into the 21st century, that a third major, you know, leg on that stool is going to be security.

and if you look around the world at infrastructure developments around the world, i think that countries like india, like the uae in some cases countries like china are beginning to see that they are in the initial stages of developing their infrastructure, and it's cheaper and more effective in the long run to integrate security into those infrastructures, infrastructure systems from the get-go. we hav very mature infrastructure systems here in the united states. in some cases aging infrastructure systems. we -- it's going to be very difficult and very costly to retrofit our systems with some of the technology that are being implemented around the world. the one thing that we do have going for us is the maturity of our private sector and public sector partnerships. the maturity of our interagency process to deal with security

concerns and we need to make sure that we are taking advantage of that asset as we also look to sure our critical infrastructure. i thk that that may be one of the major economic motivators here over the next couple of years. >> i think in some ways it may not yet be right in terms of figuring out how much the private sector really wants to do or can do on security and it gets back to some of the pnts we made earlier that the information-sharing mechanisms aren't necessarily in place, so how can you expect the private sector to be out there securing everything when they're not quite sure what they're supposed to be securing it against. you're seeing in certain elements of the security space where e private sector has taken the lead, good example in the supply chain management issues. if you look, there are a lot of american corporations who do business around the world, they have taken, you know, upon themselves to develop intelligence mechanisms,

intelligence-gathering mechanisms that do supply management and that's because it's a good business decision and to the degree we can provide more information-sharing mechanisms to the private sector on the critical infrastructure space more broadly, i think that's going to make it more ripe to figure out what the private sector is willing to do and what should be the next steps in terms of whether it's a regulatory model or volunteer model. voluntary is ideal but we haven't quite reached that. it seems like we've skipped those early steps or talked about them, but if you look at what congress has done, we've gone from zero to, okay, let's make it mandatory in certain instances or not mandatory but voluntary/mandatory but it makes it mandatory and i think we need to reassess the information sharing but that's going to take broader -- a broader way of dealing things than just the federal government because when you get into information sharing especial will i if you regionalize things you get t state and local laws and

sunshine laws an the country and how does that affect information-schafering mechanisms? that another issue. >> yes, the gentleman in the center. >> thank you. peter weaver with the international liquid terminal association. you all mentioned that a couple -- i'm going to keep on regionalization topic and perhaps you can respond to my thoughts. i got back from a meeting with a number of pvate sector folks in the dhs in the chemical universe and one of the comments that came out very strongly, a lot ofolks in industry looked at what the regulatory scheme is doing as adding a lot of cost on the compliance side, the security maners are not treating their response to the regulatory scheme as adding security to their facilities. they're seeing it as adding cost to compliance. now, some would state that facilities have a much better

understanding of their role in community resilience than a government entity can ever understand with this discussion of regionalization, it would seem this discussion of regionalization, it would seem to me that regionalization has a lot of validity from a government support role, and to your comment a moment ago, jessica, for instance, tell us what we should b protecting against. from a regional standpoint, that would seem a valid approach. but from a regulatory mandated standpoint, regionalization would seem to create a highly complicated patchwork of schemes that anything larger than a mom-and-pop organization might have a very difficult time complying with and, again, continuing to push us down the path of compliance cost rather than truly enhancing security.

any thoughts? >> i think if you're looking at a regionalization model for guidance on significant issues, big threats that come up that need to be sred with specific industries and, you know, texas/louisiana, for example, say the chemical plant example. what those chemical plants will need to do in terms of protection is going to be very different if there's not a threat against chemical plants in pennsylvania, wherever. me of them are going to be national, but some of the threats that are going to be out there and some of the risks we need to avoid may be very regional in approach. rather than saying every chemical plant in the country needs to be doing "x" and increase costs to everyone, we need to look at it on a more specific basis. obviously, that does increase costs, as you're saying, and makes it more complicated, but there are ways we can address it and look at it, and not in every area but in certain areas in terms of best practices or trying to help particular private sector entities in certain regions respo it could

be helpful that way, if that answers your question. >> good morning. my name is emilio. i'm a contractor with fema. looking at critical infrastructure, it's pretty easy to see how certain industries can play in protection of physical assets, i.t. aesz ets. now, what role, if any, does the private sector have in the social well-being of a society, especially considering that an event such as katrina, for example, has long-term ramifications for mental health, the mental health of the community? >> well, i think you have to look at -- if you're looking at social issues, look at industries that are in specific areas and look at the economic development issues because those get mixed in with critical structure issues. for example, if you look at katrina, one of the things you wanted to make sure of in new orleans was that the economic industries -- the economic development occurred.

so that would mean heing develop things like the travel industry. that's not necessarily a physical asset per se but something maybe you want to have so that it creates jobs to help with some of the people in terms of some of the social issues. if you're looking at something like mental health, having people have places to go and having the economic capabilities to kind of further along certain things i think is important. i mean, that's kind of getting to what you're saying but looking at some of the nontangible, nonphysical industries that are out there that could help i think is important. >> i'm going to ask one more question if that's okay. this perhaps might be the last question. you know, it seems to me sometimes there is a large education gap on not only risk management, but i was very appreciative that alan mentioned the systems management issues because i think there's a lot of people who don't understand that and there that's kind of an issue for being able to plan appropriately. i wondered if you might d iscus

that and whether there are ways to not only just education, i think educate congress, really, on -- that may be a hope too far, but, you know, on risk, on how systems work and how that can really drive policy, because that's a serious gap in my mind. >> it is -- it is extremely complicated. you know, we talked a little bit earlier about, you know, these issues, a lot of homeland security issues being very politicized. you know, i think that the issue of 100% cargo screening, for example, was a great, you know, issue that came up here in the last few years and that, you know, if youooked at it from a risk perspective, there was probably a different approach to take. but the fact is that it was a very politicized issue, and i'm not sure that in our system that

we are going to escapethe inevitable overpoliticization of particularly hot-button issues. i think we might be seeing a little bit of that up in new york right now. but the fact is that, you know, from the professional side of things, you know, whether it's at the department of homeland security and headquarters or whether it's in fema, whether it's at various places in the government, you know, it is our obligation to do that due diligence, to come up with the analysis to present leaders, and i applaud those in the public sector who are doing that right now. i think, frankly, there are a number of systems thinking programs that are being developed or being offered out there. i think that those need to increase and need to be, you know, integrated into the

homeland security, you know, field in terms of qualifications for jobs. i think it's part of the professional competency of someone working in homeland security today that they take a systems-thinking approach. elected leaders reason nessarily always going to followyou know, a well-reasoned, risk-based apprch. we're just going to have to live withhat in our system. >> i would agree with that. i think one of the problems you have is you'd have to change the nature of congress because congress is very reactionary in its approach to things, whether it's taking cues from the media or likely from the various constituencies of the different members. someone gets angry about something, they're going to call their member and the memberas to be responsive to that. most people, unless you educate the entirety of the united states on risk is more important than just reacting to something you've heard, it's going tbe difficult. and can moving congress away from just being reactiony to

let's look at the risk is hard. anything less than zero percent risk is not going t work because you're going to have somebody who's going to react to it. so that's part of e problem with congress. i think the other part -- and this gets into sort of larger issues of talking about various agencies andeven a regionalized approach -- is you have all the jurisdictional fights that are going on in congress. so you have different committees who want to outdo each other in terms of i want to be more -- i want to be songer and more secure on specific issues and risk doesn't bode well with that either, because that becomes something that is hard to manage and it's more of a, you know, press head than actual let's think about it and build risk into everything and ignore reactionary stuff or ignore jurisdictional issues. >> well, i want to thank bot of >> more from the heritage

foundation homeland security conference with a focus on the cyber security. ibm takes part in the discussion. live coverage begins tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. eastern. before that, and a look at the latest economic news and how wall street is reacting. our guest is roben farzad. then marc rotenberg joines the discussion. he will talk about improving medical privacy. >> we have a generation who did not have the arts very much as children. these are the 20-year olds. i am concerned about that group of people. it is not clear they will get -- come to the arts when they get older.

>> he will talk about helping struggling arts organizations. >> this weekend on "book tv" marvin looks at the aftermath of hurricane katrina and argues that businesses and faith-based companies are better equipped to handle national disasters. and sebastian goes inside the fast money world of hedge funds. for a quick listing, visit booktv.org. >> the state department did not disclose any details about jimmy carter's trip to north korea. a spokesman confirmed his main goal is to confirm the release of an american teacher and arrested after crossing the border in january.

this is 30 minutes. >> we are of the same mind. at the top on behalf of secretary clinton, we are pleased to announce the ambassador will serve as the part of a negotiating team being dispatched to sudan. they will complement the efforts of the u.s. embassy in khartoum and has our diplomatic mission this list in the final missions of complementing the peace agreement. the ambassador will join a robust u.s. leadership team and his efforts will support those of major general scott, johnny carson, adn robert whitehead.

that is all i have for you. >> are you aware of any former presidents on private humanitarian missions? >> hi will not deny the obvious. -- i will not deny. we have seen pictures from p'yongyang. president carter is -- carter is on a private humanitarian mission. >> [inaudible] [unintelligible] >> he is on a private humanitarian mission. i will not get into details. >> did anyone ask for help getting there for permission? >> private trip, i will not talk about any details.

>> that is not the trip itself. >> which is always prudent. >> [inaudible] >>, a private humanitarian mission to north korea. agenda.his i am not aware of any contacts with the state department. it is a mission to secure the release of the american, but we don't want to jeopardize the prospects by

discussion in any details. >> [inaudible] >> no. i will not discuss details. this is a private trip. no. >> is he accompanied by any state department personnel? >> i will not get into details. we might be able to talk more when the trip is over. >> [inaudible] >> i don't know that. >> [inaudible] >> i will not talk about the details of the trip. it is a private humanitarian mission to north korea.

anything else would jeopardize his trip. >> [inaudible] >> absolutely. we have long called for his release on humanitarian grounds. we sent medical officials to p'yongyang and they conducted a visit. the swedish embassy visited him on august 19 at the request of the north korean government. >> [unintelligible] now they are asking that president carter will come there and [unintelligible] [unintelligible]

[unintelligible] be some kinde will of deal with president carter. >> in is a legitimate question, but i will not get into any specifics of the trip. i will let the trip run its course. >> [unintelligible] >> we have stated repeatedly we are looking for his release on humanitarian grounds. >> you have not had any contact with him before he left? >> not that i am aware of. >> you have been trying to secure his release, but had no contact with president carter before he left? >> i am not aware of any

contact. >> [unintelligible] 4 $700,000. >> i am not aware of that. >> he is on a private mission to secure the release. how do you know the purpose of the mission if he did not contact you? >> we have seen reports. >> [inaudible] without the u.s. government knowing about it? [laughter] >> i will refer you to law- enforcement authorities. in the back. >> the south korean foreign

minister called on north korea to start disabling its nuclear facility. >> i did not hear the question. >> to reinstate iaea inspectors. he also said north korea's policy [unintelligible] do you support him? >> i have nothing to add to his remarks. we have said all along we are looking for concrete actions. it does sound like it will be in the context of those actions, but i cannot speak to what he said. >> [unintelligible] to discuss the six party talks?

>> i would refer you to the chinese government. >> [inaudible] do you think that [inaudible] >> i have not seen his remarks so i am wary of commenting on them. we have asked for concrete actions. are they sufficient? why will not said. >> [unintelligible] according to some reports, [unintelligible] but many visits are taking place.

[unintelligible] do you have any idea now why he was not appointed as the chief coordinator there? [unintelligible] >> pj address this in great detail yesterday when he said we had a robust response working in coordination with the pakistani government. that involves assets from the u.s. agency for international development. all are working in coordination with our embassy in islamabad to bring as much relief as quickly as possible. >> our basic needs reaching

directly to the people? >> that is a legitimate question. >> all i can say is this is a massive natural disaster and we are making every effort to get those assistance to those who need it most. the helicopters -- do you have any comment about the communication union issuing an appeal for people to donate money for flood relief directly into the pakistani prime minister's fund and a swiss bank account? >> i am not aware of that story.

all i can says we have several texting auctions and would encourage folks to use them. you have to go to the un. i would have to look into it. as we have said individuals can spend $10 by texting "flood." i just don't know any details. >> new documents were posted about a report from february this year about concerns the u.s. as an exporter of terror.

do you have any similar concerns? >> i will not comment on the content of the classified material put up on wikileaks? >> did anyone from him ever come to year to try to get any intermission? -- get any information? >> not that i am aware of. >> [inaudible] the 72 bodies found yesterday by the mexican marine corps were central american immigrants traveling north to the u.s. do you have any reaction to this news? >> it is a tragic event, but i don't have any details. i would have to investigate more.

>> the argentina government has accused two newspapers of [unintelligible] i would like to know if the u.s. has any concerns about [unintelligible] >> we have concerns about journalistic freedom all over the world. there is a strong debate occurring in argentina. we are paying close attention to developments. >> the ambassador was not present yesterday when the president announced -- how should we interpret that? >> you will have to ask the embassy in argentina.

we take a journalistic freedom very seriously. >> it is the state department. but i candon't know, look into it. >> the line disaster in chile. has the government asked the u.s. for any help? >> i don't believe they have come to us specifically, but we stand ready to assist. >> nasa says that they have. the request came through the state department. i will read you what they said. nasa is referring all questions to the state department.

did they not tell you you would get these questions? >> i did not talk to anyone from nasa. >> can you look into this? >> i don't think there is -- the chileans have approached us with a concrete ask, then we will evaluate it. our posture is a willingness to help them free these minors. >> it will be virtually impossible to reach a priest agreement between israel and palestinians -- reach a peace agreement. are those comments helpful heading into next week's talks? >> i would say that president's

and prime minister in that young hill had expressed confidence -- president of abbas. we are beginning the talks and getting the process going. >> you would not prefer israeli officials were not saying things like that? >> we are looking for good discussions and all options on the table. i will not get into the position of evaluating remarks. >> [unintelligible] [unintelligible] >> obviously this is the nuclear agreement with india.

i am not aware of the most recent legislation, but this issue is a good thing for civil nuclear development and indian businesses. >> how do you know that? >> this is the liability portion that allows -- sets caps if there were an accident that how much money they would have to pay out. >> that is an issue for the indian parliaments. >> it just got past in the lower chamber. >> [unintelligible]

do you have anything on that? >> i am aware of this story and would refer you to dhs. was he not arrested boarding a flight by customs officials? >> can you check on whether you have anything to say about the liability legislation's progress? i think american officials have been encouraging the indian government to move forward on liability legislation which is vital. >> i will check into it, but i am aware of the issued and we would refrain from comment while still under review. >> what is the reaction of iran

providing weapons to the lebanese? >> it speaks to what we have said previously, which is this underscores the importance to our national security to continue with our security to the lebanese army. >> you don't think this is a bad idea? >> we are reviewing the program under way and hope to bring new assistance. >> there is a growing trend in the u.s. -- yesterday i met a person this and from india. a collection of money for hindu terrorism in india. are you aware of it? are you keeping a tract of the money?

>> i would refer you to counter terrorism experts as well as law enforcement officials. >> thanks for taking my question. can you say something about the administration continuing to hang on to the line that things have changed in iraq, that politics have taken over to allow complete withdrawal by next week, and today almost 50 people have died in 20 coordinated attacks. >> i would reiterate the ambassador said a couple weeks ago, which is that these are terrible incidences.

we have seen a spike in the violence. this was so unpredictable in the sense that there are factions that are seeking to exploit a transition perdio to -- transition period to undermine progress. it still is important to be said. we continue to believe we are seeing progress on the ground. that the overall trend is positive and we have a democratic process in place that is moving forward. we believe that iraqi security forces can assume responsibility

for their security. >> can you speak to the idea that the door being ajar? he said if they ask us we will consider it. why do you say the door is still open porch, -- combat troops to go back? >> we have confidence security forces can handle this transition and be the providers of iraq's security. that is the goal, but as for an assessment of the security situation now, i would defer to odierno's comments. >> [unintelligible] how would you interpret that?

>> i have no interpretation. these are all questions -- after president carter comes back he can answer. >> yesterday's general conway said that the taliban is giving sustenance to our enemies. q. you believe they are lying -- waiting until we pull out of afghanistan in 2011? >> i would refer you to the pentagon for what he said. i can speak to what we are trying to do on the civil side. we are trying to grow police forces in order to fill the role of providing security in

afghanistan, but in terms of assessing troop withdrawal, i will defer to the pentagon. >> do you think they will still be there beyond 2011? >> i will lead the assessment to the military experts. >> can i ask you if you have any update on the status of the one man's extradition? >> no update , at some coin he will show up in the u.s. court room, -- at some point he will show up. it is a tight little process under way and will hopefully conclude soon. >> does the u.s. have any involvement in the breakup of a uranium smuggling scheme in

moldova? >> we congratulate their ministry of interior for its work in foreign -- thwarting this attempt. the government continues to work with partners worldwide for smuggling investigations, providing radiation detection equipment and increasing sentencing for these crimes. we offered technical assistance to the country. the fbi team has cooperated with the small lobov police. >> were they on the ground in moldova? >> i believe so.

>> in what was me intended targets? >> i don't know. i believe they found a smuggling ring with the uranium, but i don't know if it is clear yet what the intent was. >> yesterday pj said about the sale of radar equipment to taiwan. is this a precursor to the f- 16's? >> nothing to say on that. >> the chinese protested the plans to sell the equipment. >> you will have to ask the chinese. >> does the u.s. have a take on a defense agreement that russia and armenia concluded it will allow russian forces to remain in armenian territory until

2044? it has trappings of a defense treaty between russia and armenia. >> i think we view it as a bilateral issue. the u.s. enjoys a strong partnership with armenia. we have every expectation this will continue. russia is a part of the group, so they are playing a constructive role in that capacity. >> [inaudible] it is one of several times when he mentioned the mosque project. >> was this a recent interview? >> yes.

i know he has been advised not to do any explicit fund-raising, but are you concerned the government is [inaudible] >> we have spoken to this issue many times over the last couple of weeks. what is important is he has been counseled on the prohibition against fund raising. he has his own approach to how he will handle the media. there is tremendous amount of media interest in his trip. in terms of the mosque issue, if the races that in the broader discussions about islam and america and tolerance, that is

probably a relevant example. >> [unintelligible] people died around the globe from many states. [unintelligible] people of all faiths can come and pray. >> that is a good suggestion for new york. >> [unintelligible] the general elections in burma. [unintelligible] >> on her appeal for -- i did not hear the word boycott. we said many times we don't

feel credible elections can be held in burma. >> [unintelligible] do you have anything on that? >> who did? >> [unintelligible] they had a meeting with the state department. >> i believe a south korean delegation met with a special adviser. they met on -- they are meeting today at the department of state discussing issues related to iran, but for as further details i will refer you to the government of south korea. i believe the agenda is focused on iran.

>> the pakistan these have not responded yet. do you have any statement? >> the un issued an appeal for assistance to pakistan. they want everyone to offer such assistance, but i refer you to the pakistani government. >> can use a to the reintegration of the talha band in afghanistan? is the u.s. -- reintegration of the taliban? >> more from the heritage foundation thursday with a focus on cyber security. representatives from the defense department and ibm take part in the discussion. live coverage begins tomorrow at 10:00 a.m. eastern here on c-

span. before that, a look at the latest economic news. our guest is roben farzad. then marc rotenberg joines the discussion. he will talk about patients' rights and improving medical privacy. >> we have a generation coming up who did not have the arts much as children. these are the 20-year olds. i am concerned about that group because it is not clear when they are older that they will come to the arts. >> michael kaiser heads the kennedy center for the performing arts. he will talk about the future of the arts in the u.s. >> coming out tonight,