guest: we, who would write them? you need leadership. i'm very practical. in louisiana we beat a governor who eventually went to prison. he was a gre politician. but he had trouble with other things we had campaign reform. hat is what i ran on in louisiana. we passed some of the toughest laws in america and they are still on the books. they can't get them off. we had a series ofecent governors now led by bobby jindal who was just re-elected, a reform governor, very strong for louisiana. we turned our unemployment rate from 12.8% to it can be done, but you must clean out the top. here is what we need. leta president dedicated not to live service -- barack obama

talked-about hope that change. it never came. we need a leader free to leave that puts campaign reform has the first priority. he honors the constitution, the supreme court said monday in a speech, fine. the supreme court allowed a broader defition, full disclosure, that is what we need. if we can't look at what a politician takes, we ought to know where he gets his money from. there ought to be criminal penalties, 48 our reporting requirements so before the election, we will rmer andr buddy mitt romneyet their money. host: our last call is from

waterloo, iowa. caller: i would love to donate $100, it is nice to hear the uth that and corporations by these politicians. they speak acting like they care about the people. we knowhat weather is a big oil,srael pays billions of dollars for these politicians to speak at great about israel. i want to donate $100 for you. nothing the least corrupt out of all of these bonds is -- bums is ron paul. i wanted you to comment on that. guest: ron paul is a very decent guy.

how he has been very consistent in his issue of of the federal reserve is a valuable one. i would goor needing a full public audit. we need the federal reserve not to do two things. it should protect the value of our currency. that is a. i noted with sorrow that ron paul allowed a super pac to be formed on his behalf. they all have them. barack obama, the romney, -- mitt romney, herman cain. a candidacy like mine is wide open.

i asked my fellow republicans, who denied the super -- my fellowe republicans to deny the super pacs. let's do it the old-fashioned wa let's do it from small contributions from millions of americans. it is not the money. what we are missing is the participation of the people. they take these big checks, they of special interest requirements. what we are missing in america are people that care, people that vote, people they give $50. 98% of our home beckons don't -- of our americans don't give a dime to a president.

it is run by the 1%. i would like to see a young woman that graduates from college have 15 job offers. i would like to see a young kid that graduates from high school and is not sure aut a further education have 58 job offers. we are the most industrious, innovative, creative people on earth. but government regulation -- but we're looking to the government for answers. i start in a presidential campaign where i have not had a single fund-raiser. i go straight to the people. that is what i am asking you to do, iowa. let's change this country. host: buddy roemer, thank you

very much for [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> herman cain is making stops to talk about his plan. joining him will be his senior economic adviser. that is live at 9:00 a.m. eastern on c-span two. later, he will talk about his economic proposal and his background as a businessman. he will take questions. live, monday, at 1:00 p.m. eastern here on c-span. >> watch more videos of the candidates. see what reporters are saying. track the latest campaign contributions with c-span's website for campaign 2012. with updates from the

campaigns, candidate biographies, and the latest polling data, plus links to read all c-span.org/campaign2012. >> i think the odds are, if the super committee comes with recommendations, it will include a proposal relating to auctions of the spectrum. >> he looks at key telecommunications issues, including that neutrality and provides decision to high-speed internet to answer the areas of the u.s. tonight at 8:00 p.m. on c-span to. after european leaders struck a deal, the presidents of the european council addressed members of parliament. part of it includes a second

rescue financial plan with banks taking a 50% of laws on greek that. this one hour debate include opening remarks. >> i come to both of you, dear president, thank you for coming. only six hours after the last conclusions on the euro summit. i would like to ask the president of european councils for taking the floor. >> thank you, mr. president. dear colleagues, good morning. as i said, only a few hours ago

, all the institutions and governments have been spending a significant political capital on dealing with the debt crisis. the situation was involving into a systemic concern. it had to be contained. that is what we've done. last night was a crucial political step which still requires technical and legal follow-up. sometimes i hear complaints that markets do not give democracies at the time we need to get things approved. there is some truth in it. i am deeply convinced the markets will give us the time we need when they see a clear direction and a clear determination. we therefore took yesterday and

sunday important decisions on the problems where action is needed. first, a sustainable solution for the creek that. we want to put greece -- for the greek debt. we want to put a priest on track so by 2020 they have reduced their public debt. the new program includes an extra effort. will be putmf plan in place by the end of the. it also includes a voluntary contribution by pettit contributors -- by private contributors. it was agreed to a nominal discount of 50% of national

greek debt. second, a sufficient fire wall against -- thanks to an agreement to multiplied up to five upfold the firepower of the european financial stability facilitate rescue fund. the leverage could be around one trillion euro under certain assumptions about market compete -- conditions. we have identified two approaches to the esfs. the first books at giving credit enhancements to sovereign bonds. the second, the funds could set up one or several special purpose vehicles to finance the operation. each option would lead to leverage of up to four or five times.

they could be used simultaneously to increase the robustness of the strategy. third, we fostered confidence in the european banking sector. we have proved that a coordinated scheme the ratio of the highest quality capital will be increased 9%. this will enable the banks to withstand the shocks important in the current circumstances. state guarantees to improve the longer-term funding with safeguards. it is essential for the prospects of growth. fourth, for their fiscal consolidation by those members who need more sustainable finances and structural reforms. in this context, the summit welcomed the commitment of italy to achieve these objectives and abide by the timetable it sets

itself. these ambitious packages, the measures to increase competitiveness and to liberalize the economy, need implementation. we also command a today's commitment to achieve a balanced budget by 2013. we take note of the plan. the way to get there should be defined by the end of this year. finally, measures taken to stimulate growth about which i will say more later. i have worked hard -- the president of the european commission, to achieve these results. together, the five elements constitute the comprehensive package that are all interrelated.

the banking problems and the sovereign debt tensions shall feed each other, all to take the fact that achieving growth is the best way to reduce public debt. everything is in everything. let me take one step back. i should like to underline that the decision taken by the summit are part of a process, a process that has lasted for more than a year. all along, we had double duty. dealing with the current crisis and presenting a new one. taking emergency actions, like setting up rescue funds, but also putting together new economic governance to avoid future problems you have participated in that process. the legislation on the supervision of the financial

sector and the attack on economic governance. your debate and your work have furnished many of the ideas that have shaped this process and improved the outcome. why the acceleration these last months? before the summer, the monetary union also faced a difficult situation. that is why i convened a europe summit on the 21st of july where we decided on a package to reduce the debt burden and stop the risk of contagion thinks too flexible use of the rescue fund. the immediate political reaction to the meeting was positive. during the summer, some doubts crept in about the package's implementation. these proved unfounded in the end, the parliament and approved

it -- approved it. market volatility began to grow during the days when brinksmanship in the u.s. congress about their default add it to the flames. market speculation can sometimes -- added to the flames. market speculation can sometimes become a self-fulfilling prophecy. we had to work in a different economic climate. quote is slowing in the europe -- growth is slowing in europe and the next state. we had to take extra measures to stop contagion and address weaknesses in the banking sector. i would like to underline that stimulating growth is an essential part of the package. the european council discussed extensively and adopted measures

to stimulate growth and create jobs. beyond the immediate crisis, we have all along kept our eyes on the broader picture. only sustained economic growth can bring back confidence, agreed jobs, and absorbent deficit. -- create jobs, and absorb deficit. s. the european union is putting in place for reform of economic betterment. people who focus on one or another aspect will be announced as insufficient. it is the overall combination of institutional pressure, peer pressure, and market pressure that will help us to avoid getting into such difficulties again. all reform -- three forms have

been enhanced. institutional pressure above all. i am very happy about this achievement and your improvements to it. we took a further step last night. in agreeing that for euro area members states in an excessive deficit procedure, the council will be able to examine national budgets and adopt an opinion on them before their adoption by the relevant national power. peer pressure also has become more affective, not just because of the new instruments, such as the european semester, but as a result of these. today, no government can afford to underestimate the possible impact of public debts on another eurozone country on its own economy. they would be punished by it. if one compares this to 10 years

ago, the pressure which we put on each other has become more intense. market pressure has also increased. markets will never again trade sovereign debt in the eurozone as equal. they were asleep in the world's first decade and even if they are overactive, the market will not go back to sleep again. let me stress that these three types of pressures, to induce responsible behavior, to reinforce each other. they are already -- there already is a powerful interplay. the political pressure within the european council does not undo the institution of our market pressure. it strengthens their impact the president of the commission and i both have this experience. we all work in the same place.

sound but it cannot would debts, sustainable growth. that is the result of sound but it, -- sound budgets, sustainable debts, sustainable growth. my reasoning is simple, it is natural that those who share a common currency take some decisions together. in fact, one of the origins of the current crisis that everyone underestimated the extent to which the economies are linked. we are now remedying. monetary policy is at the heart of economic policy. we have a common monetary policy. we need a policy. monetary policy is not enough to deal with the situation. we cannot have a current -- a

common currency and leave everything else to the states. that is why we will have to go further. let me be clear, the eurozone is not a derivation of from the european union, it is part of it. the treaty is clear. it is the member states who have not joined who are referred to as member states. of course, most of them do joined the bureau. however, it is vitally important to safeguard the markets. it gives the union competion and is the very basis of our competitiveness. we must keep the two configurations as close as possible in a period of trust. i will do my utmost to avoid divisions. not only is it my intention to

organize zero summits if possible immediately following the european council meeting, it is also the case that the commission and the parliament will continue to play their roles. a third and final institutional remark. the euro summit decided to reflect on a further strengthening of economic convergence within the euro area. on improving fiscal discipline and a deepening economic union including exploring the possibility should these prove necessary of limited treaty changes. the full european council will refer to the issue in december on the basis of reports by myself in cooperation with the other presidents. of course, any proposal for a treaty revision would also be a matter for your parliament to consider. my intention is that we the what before we

discuss the house. we should discuss the goals only after, the legal instruments required. treaty changes are difficult. improvements are possible a cent of our direction. a treaty change -- improvements are possible. a treaty change is not an immediate solution. we have to get the perspective is right. this brings me to my concluding remarks. the european union is charged with coming up too little and too late. the markets have the luxury of moving at the speed of the click of a mouse. cannotcal process theses deliver so speedily. approval of the july package by the 70 national parliaments in two and a half months is impressive but political standards, even if it is low by

market standards. as a parliament, having been in the position to bring the negotiations to its conclusion, you will appreciate the importance of sound scrutiny. war over, at some point the request to be -- at some point, the request to be faster is not credible. one needs time to bring everybody on board. time is the politicians' friend. it is crucial that we put in place rules and procedures that will anticipate problems in the future and prevent them from arising. it is also crucial that we develop emergency procedures enabling a more speedy and flexible reaction. improving our capacity to react -- mutual trust the can give to the public, markets, and

ourselves. thank you. [applause] >> thank you. for your report. i would like to ask mr. president -- european commission. >> thank you very much. honorable members, following a long but constructive meeting that was concluded a few hours ago, i am pleased to stand before you and confirm that day europe is closer to resolving its crisis and to getting back on a path to growth. the summit took solid steps that should enable europe to turn the corner. half of the council, the commission demanded a comprehensive approach. we insisted that different parts

should be tackled together. we set this out in the road map to stability and growth, which i presented to you on october 12, and also sent to other governments. this road map was supported by this parliament. i thank you for this. i am pleased to inform you its elements have been comprehensively addressed at this european council and summit. we know the agreements are not an end point. they mean a beginning of a long path of work. today, we have a more ambitious platform on which to build our future growth. let it take the element one by one. first come on greece -- first, on greece. the solutions include private sector involvement. this puts market pressure on

greece and allows the country to continue its reform. we are determined to conclude work on the second financial assistance program by the end of this year. second, the agreement on the leveraging of the esfs means we have maximized the potential of our backstops. the mix of providing credit enhancement and fund arrangements will increase leverage for or five times. the commission has proposed the reinforcement of the esfs and providing it with more power, increasing the credibility of our fire walls. it is the single most crucial element of our crisis resolution effort. the element that hold the credibility of all our other efforts. third, banks. decisions will pave the way for a restoration of confidence in

the european banking sector. we are working on long-term funding of banks and requiring banks to hold higher capital ratios after taking into account sovereign debt exposures. the commission will continue to work with european banking authorities and the ecb to implement these measures. i am also pleased that italy has given its strong commitment for for the reforms. this is confirmed, not only in a letter, but also in the very clear conclusion endorsed by all the states and governments of the row area. it is now imperative that italy implement its reforms. the commission is interested

with the responsibility to monitor these effort. this is where we stand on the most urgent issues. i believe the decision gives us a strong platform from which to continue our work. i am also pleased that the summit conclusions highlight the role of the commission in economic government. in fact, half of the governments have pledged to strengthen the commission posole in assessing, monitoring, and creating budget. we will go over the legislation created by this policy. we are committed to a true economic union. i can announce that next month we will present a comprehensive package euro area economic

government. this will include a resolution linking surveillance with esfs assistance on basis of the article 126. a regulation on deeper fiscal surveillance also based on article 136 of the treaty. this is on the basis of our proposal. a communication on the external representation of europe on article 138. a green paper on euro stability bond. we will also anticipate the annual growth survey. this will give focus to the preparation of next year's economic policy. this package will give direction to integration and convergence. it will give energy to our joint

efforts, the efforts of all institutions. it will do so by upholding principles. in this context, the independent objective commission is even more important. a view expressed by this parliament. today, i can announce to you that there will be additional working instruments. there is to be a commission vice president. this is the best way to guarantee independence, of the activity, and efficiency. of coordination, sedans, and enforcement. i think it is also important and relevant not only from a substantive but from a symbolic point of view. symbols are important. having a commissioner dedicated

to the euro, we assert we want government to take place inside the community. [applause] at the same time, i believe that it is also important to insure the credibility and further enforced independence of activity -- objectivity of all or more, not only in terms of economic corp., but the collection of statistical data. i will give this is the ability to the commissioner for audits. these decisions will be transmitted to this house before the november session. honorable members, the financial stability, economic governance, all this is important.

we should never forget that our goal is to promote growth, sustainable growth, and employment. on sunday, the council, we voted -- devoted a great part of its work to this. i am pleased to have presented my vision to all of the government. i am happy to say that most of these proposals are reflected in the conclusion of the european council. the commission is working on the proposals i presented in my address and in my announcement to this house of the commission's road map to stability and growth. that includes getting agreement on the single market at by the end of 2012, for there and to the services, and rapidly adopting our proposals to increase co-parented rates in countries -- co-financing rates

in countries. i take this opportunity to urge the council once again to reach agreement on the program for the regulation for further aid to the most deprived persons. [applause] i think it is unacceptable that in a moment of social crisis as we have seen, it is the moment when, because of lack of decision, we put some of the most vulnerable people in our society at risk. the commission has also pledged to fast track in number of proposals. we will come with a proposal on access to venture capital. on the patina of december, -- 13th of december and before the

end of this year, the youth opportunities initiative to boost the employment -- youth employment. fast tracking these measures, we want to speak about digital agenda, is not just about getting that the growth we have lost, it is about giving hope to millions of europeans in their future. it is about restoring their trust and confidence in our social market economy. honorable members, working in close cooperation with the president of the european council and the president of the rope group, i will contribute to a report that will include options for a treaty change. i will consult widely with this house on the issue. i will meet with the committee and will take part in the debates as discussed early this morning. the european parliament is to be

fully involved in such major changes. the commission has heard for many months that to complete a monetary union of we need an economic union and stronger governments in the euro area. -- governance in the euro area. any treaty change should not appear as the immediate solution to the current crisis. it is true that by working to ance, wetronger government may prevent further crises. it must be done in a way that keeps the entire european union strong. we do not want our divisions between the member states of the euro area and all the member states of the european union. the euro should remain open to all member states who may join in the future. the reinforcement of the governance must be done in a

way that interest the integrity of the single market. this can only be achieved through the community institutions because they are the ones mandated to act in the interest of all our member states and our citizens in the rules-based -- treaty-based way. the role of commission was clearly recognized in the european council conclusions. particularly when it came to the need to maintain a level playing field in the internal market. honorable members, the bold decision taken over the last days and weeks and months allow us to take our matters to our partners in the g 20-20 summit. -- g-20 summit. we will push for an action plan

that will address the challenges still hindering growth at the global level. your planned to lead the global crisis response. we will not have the credibility to lead if we cannot show, as we have, that we are able to start a real solution for our own problems. by the end of this year, we will have presented all of our proposals on the banking system. that means over 30 pieces of regulation, all of which aim to make the sector more responsible and restore its position as a service to the economy. i know how much this parliament is committed to this agenda. i thank you for your constant support. europe is also the first constituency to have proposed a financial transaction tax, which we shall present as the summit in cannes. the protest movement we have

witnessed show that this is the kind of action people respect -- expect from their leaders to ensure the financial sector will contribute to society. [applause] this type of response is most effective on a global scale where it can be used to address global challenges, such as the fight against poverty. this is a message i will push strongly for. ladies and gentlemen, honorable members, i would like to say that today the european union is showing that we can unite in the most challenging of times and that we will show of unity, solidarity, and determination for european no. it is clear that growth and prosperity will not be restored in a day. as i said, this is a marathon, not a sprint. we are witnessing at a level of

determination that should give hope to all of us. the commission will continue to make proposals for a way of this crisis. i know i can count on your continued support. i thank you for the support you have shown. i thank you for your attention. [applause] >> thank you, mr. president. >> president of the council. president of the commission. first of all, you know in life you can have a glass half full or half empty. i am talking about a glass half full. first of all, i would like to thank you for the work you have done in the last 48 hours because i know it is not always

the good horse which gets the prize. i would like to give you that praise this morning. [applause] if you do not like the praise you can pass it on to the other commissioners. what i would like to repeat, what i learned immediately from your speeches, you are looking after the banks. you are not looking and not at the the rich -- in the way you understand it. i think we need to look after the poorest. it would be scandalous if we did not manage to find a solution to that problem before the winter months. [applause] there are people who thought

that on monday everything would be sorted out. i think here, in this chamber, nobody thought that. nonetheless, we were not worried. last night, late at night, i was looking at the news to find out whether we were going to have a deeper crisis this morning or were we going to begin to see a way out of the crisis beginning to emerge. i would like to congratulate both of the. i know it is not easy. i would like to congratulate you for having produced the beginning of a way of the crisis. it has not gone far enough, but i would like to return to that later. i would like to emphasize the progress made by the eurozone. we saw that the 17 in the eurozone are being criticized by others not in the eurozone.

here come in parliament, i would like to say that we are all europeans, but, we have duties. we have duties and rights. those, first and foremost, or the 17. we have made progress. the agreement reached yesterday evening with the banks means that 50% of the greek that will be voluntarily given up. the increase in the firepower of the european financial stability facility is a good achievement. everybody knows that one of the most delicate aspects to this point -- is fundamental. there is an insurance for the investor to buy loans from countries considered vulnerable. the leverage of this facility

will be extended. the third achievement was recapitalization of the banks. we have commented on that. the european council and the eurozone have been able to keep their promises on the short- term and part of the medium term. my group would encourage you to move forward even more quickly. i know that you are not going to be on holiday tomorrow morning. you will have to continue to work. the main thing is to adopt a new model of economic governance without which the euro cannot be sustained. we repeat this every day, we see this when we repeat it. nonetheless, there are things which began to be implemented. this integration, this european policy, is a necessity. i note that the countries that instruct eurozone to take strong measures have rejected any proposal for fiscal

harmonization. it is not logical. ladies and gentlemen, the european project does not mean imposing any old thing on anybody. it does not mean we have to put anybody under a yoke. the respect of the rules have to be implemented. respect of rules must be enforced. we have to see to it that the measures are accepted and fines are implemented. the european project, i can say that the recipe for europe is an ambition. we want to allow the 500 inhabitants to live with dignity. what we want is not to depend on chinese or brazilian investments, but on our own work. but you want is to set out the tracks to lead to that result. those tax man 70 shared among all those who want it.

-- those tracks mean sovereignty shared among all those who want it. you make good decisions. these measures are not the end. they are 8 -- the beginning. i have appealed to member states and also our citizens to agree to move further with political integration. i would appeal to this parliament and the european commission to continue to defend the community model. it is the model of the inclusion and not exclusion. next week, i hope that this g-20 will respect the decisions made in europe this week. they have to be sure that we will not stop halfway. we need more integration even though it is not included in the treaty. we must make progress. we do not have time to wait 10 years to change the treaty.

we have got to have internal rules of procedure if the treaty changes cannot be amended rapidly. at difficult times, we are proving that we cannot make progress without respecting the treaty completely. this hurts us in the parliament. we have the impression we have been forgotten. i do think you are in the process of implementing what we voted for here. thank you for your attention. [applause] >> next speaker, mr. president. >> thank you. ladies and gentlemen, what are the realities? what really happened? three decisions that are not final decisions. that require for their implementation. -- further implementation.

it did not generate solutions. there is a hair cut, that was a decision. 50% debt write-off, we have to get the banks to agree to that. that is not really a solution. the leverage of the esfs and two options in the discussion of article 19, the eurozone will determine on these. these are three key decisions that were produced this night. important progress, but the president said the process, which lasted more than a year, has reached an end. if you had taken these measures a year ago we would not be in the situation we are today.

social injustice such as we see in europe it will continue. it is a fundamental importance that budgetary reforms that had been planned should be implemented resolutely. indeed, what about the tax evasion in europe which continues? what about the implementation of the financial transactions? we are not going to build europe on the basis of social injustice. my plea is as follows. the heads of state and government that have made decisions on billions for the short term because of the

pressure of events, we are talking about hundreds of billions, these heads of state of government will end up with in the crisis. if we are all -- if we say it is a disaster. if we call for an increase in certain things like social funds. you talked about a corporation with a plan. you talk about the community method. i was watching the president while he said that. he adopted a wry grin. article 3 says the currency is the euro. two countries opt out.

other states have entered this -- what sense does it make to have 17 and the other group that has to adopt all the rules that that makes no sense at all. -- rules? that makes no sense at all. you put the solutions together. we have an institutional crisis on our hands. he made three institutional remarks. the first about cooperation between the europe commission -- you are the head -- the deficit, such as italy. intervention in the budgetary authority. second institutional remark, the 17 must go further.

i would do the utmost to prevent a split. third institutional remark, a treaty change. in all of these three considerations, two of these more specific, massive and executive powers are provided for or implied. they could and national sovereignty -- one institution was not mentioned. that is the european parliament. the platform of european democracy. let me make this clear to you. i am not saying this on behalf of my group but on behalf of most members of this house. what ever you do it in europe through a treaty change, you needed the backing of european parliament. this is -- in your deliberations, take the

president of the european parliament seriously. there can be no treaty change without the european parliament. ladies and gentlemen, i do not want any institutional conflicts. we need the institutions to work in a complementary fashion. the institutions have to work together. parliament with counsel, counsel with parliament. one in the council -- is there any mention of the european parliament? we are ready to work with you. i hope you are willing to work with us. if that is not the case, you will learn that you have to do so. under the lisbon treaty, we have

rights and we will use these right. s. [applause] >> thank you very much mr. president, let me be blunt. i am relieved this morning. it would be a totally other debate in the parliament was that the decisions that have been taken at 4:00 this morning -- with that the decisions that have been taken at four o'clock this morning. finally, we start to put in place a global approach to stabilize the road. i am relieved because finally, it has to be -- stabilize the euro. i am relieved because finally, it has to be stated, we stopped unhesitating of the past 20

months. -- stopped our hesitating of the past 20 months. everything has been worsened by the way this was handled. we can say today, we have done our job with the pressure on the council side and the commission said, it comes to an end. we have also to be realistic about it. it is not a few good days on the markets that means we have reached a bowl -- our goal and the euro is stable. our goal is to stablizie the euro on the long term, not one day, not one week. two things are crucial. two things are crucial in the coming days and weeks.

the new firepower of the rescue fund has to be real firepower. real firepower that means in the sense that markets are convinced by it. let's be honest, one trillion, that is in english, it is an impressive figure. it is big. there are doubts. doubts that on the long-term you offer a guarantee of 20% when on the other side we agree on 50%. how credible is this firepower? i have seen, maybe you can give more indication, there was no figure mentioned in the conclusion of the council. there is a guarantee or a possibility it is one of the options. i have not seen a figure, a concrete percentage of what this

guarantee could be. it is this guarantee, the percentage of this guarantee, that made the system credible, sustainable, and makes the firepower big and great and can be used on the market. my second point is it is important we have to use in the next weeks and months a real economic as lenient or the result. let's be clear. it is not over. markets are waiting to see that we are establishing a real economic and fiscal union parallel with the monetary union. that means two things we have to do. first of all, i urge you the fastest as possible, to announce before the end of the year, that you put the green paper on euro securities on stability bond.

it is only a eurobond market that can and that the tensions. -- end the tensions. the second thing, the most important thing, we need to establish a real economic government. again, i have nothing against the idea of the conclusions of the council that you are going to share two your estimates every year and maybe more if it is required. -- two euro summits every year and maybe more if it is required. but we need more than two meetings a year. [applause] i was 9 years prime minister. [applause] thank you. that was a long time ago. we need two times a week. two times a day. not two times a year.

we need another thing. we need to use article 28 of the conclusions of yesterday. i am pleased that we have a vice president of the commission. what we need is an inner cabinet where we share the portfolios related to the euro so we make it sustainable. so we start saying there is a government, an inner cabinet, dealing with these problems. i repeat my proposal, we have to make that this commission is chairing the meeting of the ministers of finance. let's make it consistent and not make two personalities again. my request is to come forward

with the proposal to match this problem. to get a solution for that problem there is criticism. possibilityest, the to hear this morning the debate in the house of commons in britain. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

.

>> we did it somewhat effectively encountering the soviet union propaganda. but it does take authorities, it takes resources, and perseverance to do it. >> it is easier these days because of social networking to be more effective. >> i said we certainly should be targeting iran with this kind of effort in terms of making an impact. one of the low points in american history when over a million people were in the streets of tehran in 2009 in july and we had no moral

response to that movement. of the most ne repressive regimes that we have and we didn't respond and side with them much as we have to the polish movement, the ukrainian movement and others when they get into the streets fighting against a dictatorship. there is much that we can do. it should be one of the other things in our kit. >> the final comment i have, there are things we cannot talk about that are classified. but many things that you have suggested this government should be doing i would suggest that perhaps we are already doing those things but we can't talk about them. thank you. >> the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida. >> i have a couple of questions. this is for the general and also

the colonel. does it stand to reason the iranians would not have approached the cartels for the first time with a task as delicate as assassinating an ambassador and do not it suggest a level of trust indicative of a preexisting relationship, whoever would like to address that? >> after you, general. >> of course it suggests, to take on something as vital as conducting an attack inside the united states there's got to be a relationship there and there's got to be some trust in that relationship. i want to associate my remarks and totally disagree that this is an act of desperation, that a

strategic decision is made to attack the united states because of a sense of frustration and they are involved in chaos. i totally dismiss that theory th. they came to the united states to do this because they believe is going to advantage them in their part of the world and they are trying to get the influence of the united states out of their region and they believe that they would get away with it. when bin laden took the two embassies down in africa in 1998 we lost 400 people dead. i think that bin laden makes a decision -- and what we did in terms of our response to that is we threw some missiles up into a training base in afghanistan. i think bin laden concludes i just killed 400 of them and they won't even come for us. i think we can come for them because they are weak. that is why they are here,

because we are weak. they are here because they believe we are weak and we are not going to respond. >> thank you. this question is for mr. ger everyone ght. is it true some of the car bums used in mexico are technically similar to those used in iraq by iran's terrorist proxies there? and does this indicate possible collusion or training between the cartels and terror groups? >> oh, i'm not a wiring expert. i doubt it. i mean, i think the knowledge of bombs sort of gets around. proliferation not only occurs with high technology but with low technology. so, i'm not sure that you need to see links and car bombs to suggest that you have active

engagement. i'm not denying it. but this type of knowledge is fairly ubiquitous and it spreads easily. >> anyone else want to comment on that? >> i will add generally that we should be wary of jumping too quickly to the conclusion that in order for there to have been this type of cooperation it has to have been institutionalized with lots of trust. we have found many times what you have are the same types of facilitators the gray area of people that work in imhis industries and they work with all types. that is clearly happening in mexico, the same people that will move things will guns or people and sometimes it is just an opportunity. if there was all kind of business in mexico, apparently had a contact with the individual who he thought was a member of the drug cartel, it may have been just about that a

relative in one force seized an opportunity to leverage a relative who is living here who has connections south of the bothered and might be able to do this just for money. sometimes it really is just that simple. it still is telling because there are these opportunities to leverage those types of relationships but it doesn't necessarily mean that these are institution institutionalized and we will have to wait to see how the investigation pans out to draw firm conclusions. >> thank you. i yield back my time. >> the chair now recognizes the ranking member, mr. thompson. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. let me say from the beginning th that, while there might have been some acts perpetrated before the hrlast three years o this administration that might have been characterized from a

response standpoint as weak, i'm very comfortable that under the obama administration we've taken some very, very bad people out. there is no question about it. the record is clear. so, this notion that somehow as a country we are weak from my standpoint i want to make sure to say there are some that disagree with that. but, that being said, given the situation with face now with the draw-down in iraq and situation to ask n, i want unanimous consent, mr. chairman, to enter into the record a statement by u. sfps. ambassado susan michaels. >> without objection, so ordered. >> and, going forward, doctor,

can you give some of us on the committee how you think diplomacy from the u.s. standpoint going forward would be important? some have talked about, personneling any iranian official from this country and going to other levels. but i would like to you -- and i will ask a couple of these other gentlemen where does diplomacy fit in the situation where we're today? >> as i mentioned in my testimony, i support what admiral mullens who recently stepped down as joint chiefs of staff said we are not talking to iran so we don't understand each other. i think you ought to keep the contacts open to the extent that you can.

i agree with you, with the preside president, basically reaching out to them, wanting to negotia negotiate, that it demonstrates to people in iran that we are not the enemy or completely against them. the general mentioned, if you go back and look, iraq attacked iran. we supported iraq by giving them photos that they used to drop chemical weapons on iran. so, when you say they are terrible people, there are things that we've done that, by reaching out and talking to them and using diplomatic challenges and being willing to negotiate, i think, will undermine that narrative of some people in iran that we are just out to harm them and we don't agree with their role in the world. so, i'm all for keeping contacts

open and talking to them to the extent we can. as admiral mullen mentioned, the darkest days of the cold war some u.s. interests were involved but u.s. existence was involved and we kept channels open with the soviet union. >> general, given your 37 years of military experience, what role do you see the military having with respect to iran where we are today? talked about diplomacy, but i want to talk a little bit about the military. >> let me just respond to something you already said. when i used the term weak, i was using iran's perception of us and i was not using my

perception of my country, just to clarify that. and i believe bin laden, when he believed we were weak he totally underestimated the united states of america and the characterize of our people. and i think he found that out, obviously. the role of the military right now with iran, it primarily is planning. the united states military has been asked to put together a plan to conduct war with this country. on different base sees -- bases. we have to do that planning in the event that we have strategic surprise or the unpredictable tames. in this -- takes place. in this case we plan all out war to conclude a ground war or limited action to deal with a violati

violation, mining of the straits of hormuz, or to deal with a very limited action against their nuclear capability. so there is a scale of response that the united states military has planned and those plans have been briefed all the way to this president of the united states and they are approved as plans. so, that is what the united states military does. then it goes out and educates and trains officers and leaders on how to do this and conducts exercises. when i was a commander i took part in simulations in war on iran maybe a dozen times. and you would want us to do that so that this event happens that we do not want to happen that we do it professionally and capably life.the minimum loss of that is the primary function the united states military is serving. they have pushed back against the iranian proxies in iraq so

we are directly involved in that and still it some degree today but that will be minimized dramatically. and we push back against the propbs -- proxies against the taliban. but the primary mission is the one i just stated. >> thank you. >> the chair now recognizes the gentlela gentlelady. like to ask unanimous consent of the gentlelady from texas mrs. jackson-lee be seated and be allowed to ask questions. >> so ordered. >> i want to thank the general and colonel for their service and i want to thank the colonel for his role, so to speak, in beirut in 1983. i would like to enter in the

record, a friend of mine from high school timothy mcneely who played football with my brother, who i knew personally who died in the marine corps barracks there in 1983. it is not lost on a lot of us that have been following this situation that the terrorist arm of iran hezbollah has been involved with the mexican drug cartel for quite a while. we have raised awareness, mr. chairman, a number of times about this over my shorten months being in congress. i want to kurkjian the members of the committee that have not signed on to resolution 429, which mr. higgins and i have sent a "dear colleague" letter around on. that resolution basically urges

the administration to include the western hemisphere in the administration's 2012 national strategy for counterterrorism area of focus. because ware of the triborder region and venezuela and now a stronger working relationship between hezbollah and the mexican drug force. so i would urge you to co-response so sore -- co-sponsor that. knowing our porous southern border, knowing there is a working relationship that has been revealed, what could we be doing differently as a solve right hand nation on our -- sovereign nation to keep infiltration of personnel or weapons into this country? colonel? >> i live in arizona.

it has gotten better, there is no question about it, through the efforts of a lot of dedicated people. but i have to look back from a historical standpoint and how these things develop and what we can do and what impact they have. they are always very hard to measure, particularly in reallitime. and it is tkhredelayed reaction is usually after an attack. i use as a sample of that from perform history -- personal history the mission in beirut, the blowing up of our industry, the attacks on the two embassies in east africa that the general talked about earlier that essentially went by with no respon response. al qaeda never had the capability for the suicide coordinated attacks that

hezbollah pulled off during the beirut mission that killed us. they did not have that expert e expertise. and bin laden took inspiration from this success of those attacks and part of that was our nonresponse. and there was a -- until there was a meeting between him and his points man for the she why who was part -- shia as the point of attack for us in beirut. they had a meeting in sudan in 19 1996. al qaeda's first coordinated simultaneous suicide bombing, the first mission, were the two u.s. embassies in east africa. and they expanded that same

beirut model for the four commercial airline hijackings, simultaneous, coordinated attacks for us here on 9/11. so, i use that with all the activity that is going on in what we know about and, more importantly, what we don't know about, is building operational businesses in venezuela and margarita island. and remember that hezbollah has been operating drug trafficking in the triborder region for a long time. so when they talk about using cartels in mexico they are familiar with this and i'm sure they have very good contacts with the different ones. they are shopping probably and all of this. so, when they say this is sort of a bumbling attack that shouldn't be taken seriously and all this, i think it is at our

own risk if we ignore that. that is part of the problem with this is our freedoms are our vulnerabilities and they know how to play this every which which. but to use what a major -- and i couldn't agree more that when you have a link to assassination in this country in our capital of a saudi -- of the saudi ambassador, the hutzpah that they have and to try and the commander connection with that and just walk that back and who would be the minister of defense and what is their background and so on, i would take this threat very seriously. a and, again, the whole threat, i into what we don't know as much as what we do know. and i know that the f.b.i. and

intelligence community there's a lot of great work on one of the reasons that we have not been here.ed but i will guarantee you that the iranians and this current crowd that runs them, they are driven, they are object sellsed. it is -- they are obsessed that they are going to -- we are on their target list primarily, and when it does happen it will probably be as they have can he targets and spectacular, coast to coast or whatever, even a memorandum -- mumba style of attack. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> i agree. i think the potential combination between iran,

hezbollah and the drug consider tells is very powerful and dangerous. with that, chairman, recognizes mr. davis. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. i want to thank the witnesses for a very enlightening discussion. mr. gerecht, if i understood you to imply or suggest that the governance of iran is such that you don't necessarily get the same response that you might get from the use of sanctions with another country, and that maybe there is a distance between the governing bodies and the people to the extent that sanctions may

not play the same role that they play in another country. >> yes, i mean i think sanctions in iran have been effective in many ways. but if you just take the guard corps, for example, it has gotten richer and more powerful as sanctions have gotten toug r tougher. for them, the last five years have been pretty good years. so, i think that you always have to try to see it as they see it. and they have lots of publications. they have their own world. it is actually not that hard to read the guard corps. i met a few guardsmen. in addition, it is not hard to get a grasp of how they see the world because they are fairly forthright in telling you. there are nuances and variations

between individuals in the top or bottom of the guard corps, family history and all of those things come into play. when the supreme leader tells you that he is not scared of sanctions, he is telling you the truth. he is not. now, that is not to say that sanctions haven't hurt them and that bureaucracy and the business community isn't aware of the damage they have done to iran. but i think that you have to be very careful in believing that sanctions that would make us stand up and take notice do the same to them. i would make one other quick comment. it is natural that the iranians would gravitate and not be spoofed by a drug cartel because the revolution is responsible for a vast amount of opiates that go to turkey. it is one of their major income producers. so it is something they would

gravitate toward. >> thank you very much. recognizing that sanctions have been used as a diplomatic tool for a long taoeuime -- i mean i of a normal reaction oftentimes ultimately. dr. levitt, how do we make the assessment of how impactful the use of sanctions might be? how do we determine whether it is doing what we want it to do or whether it is something that we are doing but the value is not there and we are not getting the kind of responses that we might be looking for? >> the most honest answer is, with difficulty. but it comes down to, at its

core, determining and admitting -- and there is no one answer to this across government, not this administration or the prior administration -- what you are trying to achieve with sanctions. if you are trying to achieve disruptions they have been tremendo effective.y there are ways it can be done better. there are things we should do more. but it has been tremendously successful there. now, do you also think or expect or hope that you will put enough sanction and economic misery on either the revolution narrow regime or maybe even at some point the people though the sanctions on the regimes are mostly affecting those in elicit conduct, not the shotgun that we had in iraq that affected people as well. do you expect some combination of sanctions like that would lter the calendkacalendar cued and -- calculus?

perhaps an inhibitor, something that might cause them their -- cost them their survival? don't think that is the case. i don't think we will be able to do that. but we can do enough sanctions that will be increasingly disruptive, buy us more time and do things, as i think that a designation of the central bank would do, that would have more impact on the country. i would also argue in the house, senate, banking finance and in and out of government that what we need to do is get a better mix of the cocktail sanctions. for multilateral engagement purposes and other reasons we have focused on sanctions that are graduated, target the on those mostly involved in the illicit conduct.

we can focus on them but it will only be so effective. we need sanctions that will have impact on people on the ground. that sends a message through domestic iranian channels to the and that is a different way of threatening their level of comfort. ultimately, this is a tool, not a policy. it is a tool which, if used in other tools, can be effective. my problem is, and i used to complain about there when i was in government, but not because it is the right tool but because we don't have better answers we want to use this because we can done something. when i was a treasury official i would argue against using treasury authority because there was nothing else to do. there are ways we can target better and we should be pursuing central bank of iran. i would hope this would be done momentum laterally because of the potential impact on the

international economy that is fragile at the moment that. is not something i would say we should do unilaterally because it would have an international impact because of the way banks react to reputational risk issues. but more aggressive designations over a period of time targeting all kinds of entities and exposing them even if not seizing assets, is the type of thing we could do unilaterally with zero cost. >> thank you very much. thank you, mr. chairman, for your indulgence. >> it is really a fascinating hearing this morning and i thank for being here. certainly we have a wide range of experience and a wide range of opinions on what we need to do, when we need to do it and how we need to carry it out.

certainly i believe that the comments about iran's hate and obsession for us is what drives their action against us even more than the fact they might perceive us as being weak. it is interesting, a couple of hours ago the general's testimony and mr. gerecht's testimony, general, you believe that so far it sounds like the sanctions which we have been using have been not as effective as they could be. and you used the term that we ought to be grabbing them by their throats and ramping up the sanctions, everything from seizing their assets to denying them entry into ports around the world. mr. gerecht feels that until we

shoot somebody they are not going to pay attention. sitting here two hours later, is that still your view, general, that the ramped up version of the sanctions is really where we ought to be going now? or do you feel like the only way to get their attention is to use military action and actually shoot somebody? >> you know, i do think the fact that they made this decision to come inside the united states and conduct this attack is something that we should not walk away from. and we should not treat it lake other terrorist attacks in the region even though many of them were against us as well. all i'm suggesting is they have been killing us for 30 years and we all know that, and until we get more effective with a

response they will continue to kill us and they will continue to work against our interests in the region. remember, their objective is to drive us out of the region. that is clearly what they want. so, to date, on the merits of it, we have not been effective in stopping them from one killing us, two, sponsoring terrorism, and, three, continuing a program to develop nuclear weapons, which i'm convinced they have not given up on. so, i want to relook at the whole issue, number one. admit to us that they are our strategic enemy and use all the elements of national power, hold the military element in check, and as i said figuratively get our hands around their throat using all those elements of national power and do it comprehensively and as nearly

simultaneous as we can. i agree that we should target th them. my god, we have had other terrorist organizations and leaders who killed us and we targeted them and killed them. why do these guys get a pass? they should not get one. they should feel that pressure. i'm not suggesting that we bring in military forces and conduct operations inside iran. i'm not suggesting that at all. i am suggesting that we conduct covert operations. i'm suggesting we conduct espionage that is covert. they have to feel some of this pressure. and if we don't recognize that, convinced that it is just going to continue. >> thank you. does anyone else want to answer that? you are backing down from shooting someone?

obviously being low on the totem pole here most of my questions have been asked and answered. one of the things maybe i will ask the entire panel, none of you really mentioned it or suggested it, but a lot over the years, i think a lot of these attempts have been thwart ed thanks in large part to our law enforcement officials on the ground. and, of course, congress is in the middle of some tough debates on our budget, our super committee is looking at cuts to our defense. many of our homeland security grants are looking to be pared down and some eliminated altogether. i know i have been pushing for our port security grants to continue for another career because i still feel like our ports are a vulnerable entryway into this country.

i would like to hear some thoughts on the importance of continuing to fund programs that directly help to secure our local law enforcement efforts on the ground as a way to continue to attempt to thwart what we may not be able to stop another way. >> i think the way that you need to do this is look at national security in a whole his particular way -- holistic way. whatever you decide to spend on department of defense, state, recognize they all contribute. you mentioned the fact that you were concerned about port security. do you realize we spend more on one program in the department of defense missile defense than we do on the entire coast guard? if you look at it in a holistic

way you say where is it likely that somebody will shoot a nuclear weapon at us i would give it to the latter. i had give more priority to that but the reason you can't is because you have a stovepipe when you do the buckets in the executive branch and do it over here. so whatever number you decide to reduce to deal with the deficit i suggest you look at it in a way.tic for years we have been putting out the unified national security budget that assesses some of those tradeoffs. we take the amount the administration, bush and obama, and how you could get more bang for the buck. >> any other comments? >> the former f.b.i. guy here i concur. this is an amazing example of what we can do. i mentioned earlier a d.h.s. program on customs enforcement here and abroad. people in brussels doing

tremendous work. sometimes i'm concerned that wawe minimize the importance of the role law enforcement gets politicized sometimes. these are not either/or sanctions or military is not an either/or. it is getting the mix right. i think this demonstrates what we are doing at home and to be clear what we are doing abroad. this was not thwarted at home. it was thwarted in mexico because d.e.a. was doing what it does exceptionally well every day. and we need to maintain that vigilance. that money needs to be cut is also clear. i'm glad it is your job. >> meeting with these acts that pulled this off they did a magnificent job. with that, the chair recognizes mr. higgins. >> thank you, mr. chairman. an iranian political and terror

ethose there is the near enemy, israel, but there is also the far enemy, the united states of america. the topic of this hearing is iranian terror operations on the american soil. so, i commend my khraeg, jeff duncan, for his bipartisan resolution to include as an area of focus the western hemisphere and our nation's counterterrorism efforts. i think it is very important. hezbollah, the party of god, is a shia terrorist group highly committed to violent jihad. hezbollah acts as a proxy, as a pawn, as a tool, for venezuela, syria and iran. hezbollah has a presence

estimated to be between a few hundred to a few thousand in a 16-country region of latin america. hezbollah also has a presence in 15 american cities including four major cities in canada. we were told at previous hearings that, while the confirmation of hezbollah's presence in north america is indisputable, that we should not wor worry, that they are just here for fund-raising activities. hezbollah, a terror group, committed to violent jihad, i don't make the distinction between fund-raising and terrorist activity. fund-raising for terrorist activity is a terrorist activity. i represent buffalo, new york.

and i know from terrorist history, terrorist cowards look for high impact targets. we have the peace bridge that connects buffalo with southern ontario, the busiest northern border crossing for passenger vehicles in north america. we have niagara falls, a destination of millions of people every year. we have 90 miles away toronto, a multi- cultura multicultural, fascinating international city. a have in close proximity project that produces the cheapest, cleanest and most electricity in all of new york state. i would like you to comment, consistent with the hearing's topic, iranian terror operations on the american soil, be it iran

directly or their proxies who do their dirty work for them, and what more can we be doing about their presence, their direct presence in 15 american cities and four major canadian cities, generally in north america. i'm grateful for the question because i'm completing a book on hezbollah's global presence and i have several chapters on it so i know at least one person will read it. it is more than 15 cities in the u.s. and more than four in canada. several years ago, in written answers to follow-up questions officials conceded that they see hezbollah doing more than fund-raising. do preoperation surveillance. they believe it is primarily done for the purpose of vetting

new recruits. but if i were a terrorist master mooned vetting a -- mastermind there would be other ways to make sure this person was a capable fund-raiser on surveilling u.s. federal buildings. one of the greatest surprises about the plot is they were doing this on their own whereas usually they are doing things together with lebanese hezbollah. that has been the m.o. in the western hemisphere, in argentina. it was the m.o. earlier in 1994, a few months before the bombing in thailand and attempted bombing of the israeli embassy there that was thwarted because the bomber got into a car accident and in many other cases. that may suggest their current capabilities here are not so high. as i noted, they have faced a series of failures since 2008 when they tried to resurrect

what was a nice isn't foreign terrorist operations capability in the wake of the assassinat n assassination. be concerned about this and we need to be concerned about the crossings not just to our south but to our north. in one case we know of, the person who was smuggled across from mexico had connections in canada. another who was arrested trying to carry out a bombing in israel had canadian citizenship and an indictment was released for him in the dearborn area and there is a lot of movement cross the bridges, more in the michigan area but i'm sure in yours as well and this is something we need to be cognizant of. and the good news is and it is not just because of working for

the f.b.i. but researching for the back i have met with field offices and local police and others and f.b.i., d.e.a., the work they have done focused on hezbollah in particular is impressive. >> i will make a quick comment. the hezbollah is vastly more comfortable with the expatriate lebanon necessary shia population than the -- the interesting exception might be in canada because in canada you have what i would call the second generation of iran immigration and more devout communities that are closer to the folks back home. they exist almost in ghettos in canada, which is something you don't see almost anywhere else with iranian expatriate communities. so they are naturally going there and that is why they sent one of the brothers of perhaps the most famous family in iran to be a cultural attache.

the hezbollah has -- there is no way around it -- has in a certain prestige amongst the lebanese shia community even with lebanese shia who ideologically are not in sympathy with the hezbollah. and it is a problem. and it is just a problem that you have to be aware of. that is why the hezbollah is much more effective maneuvering overseas than the iranians are. >> the chair now recognizes the gentlelady from texas mrs. sheila jackson-lee. >> mr. chairman, thank you to all of the chair persons and ranking members. let me graduate you for the topic of this hearing. i think that if there is ever a time of unanimity on perspectives dealing with iran, it is certainly on the point that they never stop and that we

have concerns that need to be addressed. with you, doctor, on what may be a far-stretched inquiry, why did the arab spring miss iran, even though i think it was about a year ago they might have proceeded but they didn't succeed but i rather iranian americans in great emotion when the people of iran rose up, stood on mountains, we will never forget that insightful picture of a young woman bleeding. >> i think the reason it hasn't is similar to what has happened in syria, bahrain, that is that people use the threat of force to make sure it doesn't happen. remember, in egypt the arab spring succeeded because the military refused to continue to

back the mubarak government. and in lybia, once the rebels got a strong hold the international community was able to come in. you just don't have those circumstances. and people like admiral mullen, the others said the last thing you want to do is have to put military involvement in. >> why do they say that? >> it would be counterproductive. it would unify the country against the threat from outside and it would also basically they would step up, i think, the activities that have been described here in other parts of the region. but i can't emphasize too much in my own personal view time is on our side. they can't keep doing what they are doing giving their serious ally is not -- whatever happens in syria, they are no longer going to be able to use the syrians the way they used to.

>> let me put on the record, i have no friendship for the iranian government. i do believe that the people the there is a body admit would not freedom. and i'm also in concerned in reference to a war that i did oppose although i respect all this served ably in iraq because i feel like that we have left maliki in the hands of the government and he doesn't seem to be able to be independent. but do you agree terrorism today is terrorized it a certain extent, meaning individual actors are engaged in terrorism? >> yes. >> and did you make a point that we were preparing for war against iran? your comment that i heard? that military makes plans? >> no.

my comment was talking about the sanctions and so on. the sanctions that we have had for 25 years against iran, as sanctions are increased and so on, one of the major purposes for the sanctions are what is the response of the one you are sanctions against, which is iran. and we have seen a steady pattern that continues of them expanding their terrorist activiti activities, and when you look at -- if you just step become, not if the -- if you just step back, not that the sanctions have had an effect, they have some but as dr. levitt said, they are more of a tool than a policy.

but the point that i was getting at is, with the sanctions, you look back and what have they accomplish accomplished. and iran, throughout this whole period, has not only retained but expanded their terrorist activities as the number one world sponsor of terrorism. then the question is, right in the middle of that, they decided to go nuclear in open defiance against a united world against this, not only in the region but worldwide and how they are fighting that in your face and continuing that, yes, there has been the current sanctions that are disrupting that. but at some point in time there has to be, are these going to be effective enough in order to have iran change the behavior. so, that is constantly being looked at. it is not going to war with

them. the other thing with iran, i refer people to read the book by the iranian -- called a time to betray, it was a c.i.a. agent inside the irgc during this whole period. and it gives insights of what the mindset and how brutal they are in suppress iing any kind o protest in protesting within iran. and you saw it bubble up at the 2009 re-election of ahmadinejad. but the focus was so severe, and the fellow that is doing that is the minister of interior that is suppressing all of that. that is why you don't hear it in

the protests within iran. > dr. levitt, i wanted to ask you a question. thank you, colonel. i want to follow up on this point. following up on the colonel,ening he clarified as we accelerate in the frustration with iran as it might be with any country the military of the united states always are engaged in planning or preparation and doesn't mean they are engaged on moving on a country. i think that is the interpretation. i notice in your testimony you indicated that the saudis had at one point asked that the head of the snake should be cut off. on this question of terrorism as it circulates around this horrific and horrendous potential assassination that is here, we have the responsibility, i believe, that if we act in any way, one it club -- it should be

collaborative we should be consistent in protecting the homeland. do you have a response on how you discriminagenerate those th short of saying we are going to allegedly attack this sovereign nation that particularly has nuclear capacity? >> thanks for the question. i think that it is important, as you have heard basically everyone on the panel describe in one way or another this be an all element of national power approach. it is not sanctions or something not law enforcement or something else, not covert action or something else. it is all of them in tandem, at the same time. and i think it is at the same time 3 -- in tandem. in a short period of time. we have done a lot of these and paused and wait. what we need is a clear message and that need not be military action. it should be a lot of different

types of action at the same t e time. someone earlier asked about creating or promoting or undermining fissures within the regime. you asked about arab spring one thing that treasury i know has tried to do is try to target sanctions when it is doing sanctions to promote fissures within the regime. that one reason the administration came up with the human rights executive orders and it is the kudz force that are responsible for cracking down on peaceful protests and responsible for the missile program and of course sponsorship of terrorism. in that sense the redesignation -- message.mentaphepbmental we can target them to have multi-end purposes not just trying to shut down the next front trying to procure material or prevent somebody from

traveling but send messages to the iranian people that we are promoting their efforts at peaceful protest. that is really important. you do all of these in tandem you can send the message. we talked much earlier about messaging. you can promote security in the homeland and even disrupt their activities abroad. i think we need to do all of these. >> the chair recognizes the closing comments. >> i want to thank the panel for a remarkable presentation today in addition to the response to the questions. we have heard everything from bumbling and disarray but we hear lethal and persistent. i think one consistent thing is they are here and as a result we have to come together with some appropriate response. i want to thank you for taking the time to raise the red flags that we have discussed that have

not been seen or watched before. and i certainly hope that at the failure of imagination that was discussed at the end of the 9/11 clearly your kind of study of this current moment allows us to anticipate and i hope we are able to respond in an appropriate fashion. thank you for the work you do, what you have done and continue to do to help us to protect our country. >> the chairman recognizes mrs. spear for her closing commence. >> i would like to associate myself with the comments made, chair. i also want to say thank you for your presentation. i want to underscore the fact that many of you in further earthquake recognize that military action, immediate military action is not what we should be looking at. but it is very clear anything we do look at needs to be multilateral, that our villages

to be heightened and we need to do everything we can to nurture the arab spring that is concerning lating within -- that is percolating in iran. >> mr. chairman, may i? >> it is getting late. >> may i put a question on the record, please? pose a question to you. >> you might not answer it and i that.iate one of our difficulties for those of us engaged with the iranian resistance in the united states and europe is we need to delineate and declare whether there group can move forward in a nonterrorist label. they may be in fact individuals that coulden courage the democratic move in -- could enduncan the democratic movement in iran. they are viewed as good citizens and they are asking this nation to address the question. this hearing asks about terrorist activities that discriminate from -- generate

from iran. i hope we can get an answer from iranian americans who are supporting the iranian resistan resistance. >> you raise an excellent point. let me thank the witnesses for being here. it was very compelling testimony and particularly the fact that this assassination attempt in washington was sanctioned at the highest levels of the iranian government. i think that sent a mental to us and we need to send a clear message to iran and we need to respond effectively to iran and we have failed to do that since 1979. i think the takeaway i get all elements of national power, we to treat iran as a strategic enemy and seize their financial assets and we need an offensive cyber campaign against them. we need sanctions to enforce the sanctions to get to central bank. we need more aggressive

designations. we need the expulsion of iranian and hezbollah operatives in this country. we need a significant covert action against iran. finally, we need to support this resistance movement within iran, this youthful secular movement to overthrow the ayatollah khomeini. with that, we are going to submit a letter to the president that, with the findings of this hearing, i would hope that with their ranking members join us in the letter to the president. this has been a very productive hearing. thank you for being here. this hearing is now adjourned. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

[no audio] [no audio] [no audio] >> republican presidential candidate herman cain is making a couple of stops in washington, d.c. to talk about his 999 sacks plant. he will speak at the american enterprise institute and he will be joined by his senior economic adviser live at 9:00 eastern on