they know what to look for. they can identify a reason why we need that information to flow to us. we have very careful measures in place to protect civil liberties. it is respecting privacy and the guarantees under which we all live. >> your testimony was after that review. they had similar occurrences like would be minimized.

>> yes. >> one of your responsibilities is reviewing some of the training material that is going out in the broader community to address this issue. it i think part of it is some of this training material has been identified as perhaps misleading. can you suggest to the committee a way to address some uniformity standards within the training for this issue? >> yes. there are too critical parts. the first is that we do not want to inhibit our ability to educate.

how do we get our officials to understand the threats and how they can react to them in a proactive manner and understand them at in debt to focus on the trajectory of our time? to achieve uniformity, we need to instill there is a competency in people in producing the training materials. that they are rigorous and based on sound research and that they are fact based ended a void of personal opinion. -- and devoid of political opinion or personal agenda. we accomplished that, the reviews have shown this to be the case.

>> they are putting into place whether we can do that and maintain the unit cohesion. are you confident the items you work don will identified the issues alboin not jeopardize unit cohesion? >> with the issues we punished is that there are a multitude of reporting mechanism should they observed one of the behavioral indicators. they can report it to counter intelligence agency and investigator. they can report it to a commander and squad leader. we put in place a link on the

army knowledge network. they report the and information. they are using all of these been used to report. it is very effective. >> the gentleman from carolina. call them for what they are. it is violent, violent extremism. -- violent radical islamic

extremism. they make sure that they are aware of it. this is one of my most important jobs. thank you for being here. you referred to empower local partners to prevent violent extremism, stating the best defense are well informed and equipped families. could you elaborate what he meant by this? >> my pleasure. the president has issued a new strategy last august empowering local partners to prevent violent extremism in the united states. families are an important part. muslim families are an import part of feeding the recruitment and radicalization american

citizens and residents and the efforts of al qaeda it to turn them into attackers against military communities. we view the opportunity to treat families across the nation as partners in the shared endeavor. it is an important component of the overall strategy the president has issued. >> thank you. according to the investigation, the army currently does not share counter-terrorism and information. -- inoformation given to it be the f.b.i. could you confirm this. why is this the case?

>> i disagree with that statement. we do share the information with our local commanders and security officers in the chain of command. every time you receive information, it indicates a threat. we go through great means to make sure all leaders have information a they can have the appropriate decisions. >> that is good to know. thank you very much. to what extent is al qaeda planning to infiltrate the members into the military? do you see an increasing trend in this? >> parts of that question will be addressed in a closed session.

in terms of recruiting, you carried a distributed network. it make it inaccessible for anybody regardless of their ethnicity to participate and belong to this. it decreases the barriers of entry. the continue to paint the military as war criminals. it will induce further people to further target the u.s. military and will increase the insider threat. >> thank you. >> see discussed it and are carrying this out.

-- attacks on soft military targets such as recruiting centers. >> what can be done to harden the stock it? >> i welcome to address that ben closed session. we would keep the classifieds. >> my time is expiring. thank you very much. i yield back. >> i recognize the gentle lady from california. >> thank you. thank you for being before us. my husband is a retired military officer. on 9/11 he was in germany. he is a lawyer.

he oversaw that in germany. he recalls the day after 9/11 he had to go in and talk to lawyers on the other side furlough all municipalities and explain how and why we had driven tanks all over the town. obviously, we had somewhat overreacted to what had happened over here. he had to explain what we are doing by driving our tanks oliver town in shutting things down. i think we need to plan ahead. so we do not have these types of reactions. we need to plan ahead and with our local been sodalities and law enforcement when these type of things happen and when the plan against a terrorist attack.

i think when we saw a search to figure out what we need to do, and that is very important. we have looked at much of this to try to figure out what we do and how we do it. education is very important. education of the troops. i would like to ask consent. there are some muslim soldiers. it is a great institution. they want to be a part of the military.

we talk about how it is looked at differently. even though still have silver stars, there always looked at with questions. -- in the eyes of their fellow unit members. my question is, may i introduce them into the record? >> without objection, so ordered. >> what is do we bring? -- what do they bring? to be considered not having muslims? i live in the middle east. it is important to know the language of the people. some people say let's not have these people. what would you say to something like that? >> i would begin by referring

back to the comment that chairman team made earlier. chairman king made earlier in the hearing. recognizing the tremendous contributions of muslim americans. we need a muslim americans in the united states military. we need native speakers. we need patriots of all religions joining and maintaining the strength of our armed forces. you raise an important challenge. how do we both deal with the reality that al qaeda and the affiliate's are targeting department of defense facilities as a target of choice and recognize that we need an value of muslim americans in the united states military? the way forward is to focus on indicators of violent behavior and radicalism where we can watch the behavior and train

our personnel to watch the behavior of our soldiers in order to identify and intervene effectively when they say indicators that within our ranks we may have its spirit >> my father prosecute many of non muslims for killing their wives and kids in the military. >> it to be anybody you is exhibiting behavior to indicate a propensity to become a violent terrorist. it is about al qaeda and its affiliates in the primaries at home. >> thank you. >>you mentioned the intellectual underpinnings of radical islam and the training.

the theology of islam is easily understood. prayer and fasting and charity and the adherence to the natural law. do unto others. beyond that, there is an overlay of politics. there is a battle within islam. the political aspects of this are problematic. it would serve our interests if we understood more about what is going on within islam. have we talked to those to get a -- imams and mullahs to get a

better understanding of the politics and theology? is there a movement afoot for the intellectual justification to combat this within islam? are retaking advantage of it? is this considered too sensitive to be addressed? >> thank you very much. it the best way to answer that is to point out that there is a significant distinction between the politics and the theologies that are embraced within the tradition and culture. it has perpetrated and developed here.

want to make this distinction, which then can start to parse these two pieces of part. i would argue that the entire intelligence community have had extensive outreach efforts to understand not only from the perspective of what they mean in consulting with academics, but also to understand what it means in the american context. we can see different effects. this comes back to the education question that they address. it inhibits our ability to really address the problem in comprehensive manner. that is what he has done very aggressively. we have educated over 4100 law enforcement officials over

about 60,000 hours of education. how is it we can make these people smarter to understand these distinctions? what we do not want to do is to harm the community and create worse relations. >> it is an excellent question. i would urge all members and staff to become familiar with the new white house strategy. it is focused on the challenges that you discussed and highlights a new way forward. it did meet the challenges that we confront. >> can you identify any leaders in the muslim community better helping you in this regard? >> i would be happy to take that question for the record.

>> thank you. i know that. -- i yield back, mr. cha irman. >> thank you for your courtesies. before i left houston, i initiated with our soldiers a bad yellow ribbon campaign for the troops coming home at the end of december. it is evidence that america loves her military. if they would allow me. i do have questions. i want to quote a comment from secretary gates that says it reflects the strength of our national diversity and is composed of patriots who are first and foremost soldiers, sailors and marines.

i would like to change the discussion and talk about americans. american soldiers to happen to be a many different faiths. i indicated that i am here to be a problem solver. those who lost their lives were my neighbors and friends. i went to the memorial service. it is a memory that i will never forget. it will never be extinguished. to mr. long, i say that we are paying for the enormous tragedy. we should be here to solve problems. i want to quote from you as i hold up a little book that i

have done before. we are constant reminders of the value of this book. our soldiers are defending the constitution. we do have a freedom of religion. it is important to note the comment that he made about primary threats of al qaeda not at war with islam. he stated homegrown terrorism happen to be of a particular faith. -- have limited contact with those across the ocean, if you will. they are intensified by their own research, by the internet. we have within our borders the ability and skills and tools that should be utilized to

stamp out those who would do us harm. let me quickly notes and paid tribute to he he died in afghanistan a 26 year-old muslim. he was among five soldiers who were killed. his family and the knowledge that he was picked on the in military but his goal was to die defending against act of terror and a violent interpretation of islam. let's put that on the record. let's pay tribute to those who have died. why did the military who were aware of the violence passed that information on? let me add other questions you can ask them. soft targets are here.

we see our soldiers traveling to airports in bus stations. some soldiers will be coming home and going into neighborhoods and corners across this nation. what have we begun to do to already addressed the potential of soldiers who are walking alone. there is the idea of data bases. one of the recommendations is to do this. >> i would like to answer your first question about the activities of major hasan and why they were not reported. we did not have the right behavioral indicators to the forests.

to the force. we do not educate our force in this regard. since that time, we have revised regulation. i am confident it would allow soldiers to report the information that they have discussed about him. i believe the bottom line is that we did not do it properly. it denied the report said. >> we are doing more as it relates to behavioral training. it overcomes the idea of stigmatizing one religion over and other. are we focusing on the individual acts of an individual soldier? >> in the table, they have extremist activities. they are focused on the behavior of activity that would

encompass those topics. >> any response on the soft targets? there be on the basis. -- that are beyond the bases where our soldiers are wearing their uniforms? >> local law enforcement and having our military have this with them so they can be in the lead. the military's family and soldiers are in the united states. i yield back. >> i recognize the former attorney general of california. >> thank you very much. let me say i great support for those who are serving in military today. are we at war with violent islamist extremism?

>> no. we are at war with al qaeda. >> is violent islamist extremism at war with us? >> no. . we are being attacked by al qaeda. >> can al qaeda be an exponent of violent islamist extremism? >> al qaeda is murderers. >> is al qaeda acting out of violent islamist extremism? >> al qaeda is a violent organization dedicated to overthrowing the values that we -- >> yes or no? >> can i hear the question again? i will make it as clear as we can. we are not at war with islam. >> i did not ask that. i asked whether we are at war with violent islamist extremism.

>> we are at war with al qaeda. >> how does al qaeda define itself acts are the dedicated to violent islamist extremism? >> they would love to convince muslims around the world that the united states is at war with islam. if that is a prime propaganda tool. i will not aid in that. i do not think it is helpful to frame hour at its erie. -- frame our adversary as islamic with any set of qualifiers we might add because we are not at war with islam. >> i never said we were at war with islam. we're trying to do with the

radicalization. is it a behavior indicator to put on your car that your soldier of a lot? -- that you are a soldier of allah? >> an indicator that you have a copy of inspire magazine? >> that is not my question. is it a behavioral indicator to put on your car that you are a soldier of allah as major hasan did? >> we have this that enables our personnel. >> you have to follow up and investigated. -- if you put "soldier of allah" on your car.

>> we are training our supervisors to follow up on inappropriate indicators. >> do you agree with the statements of someone representing the department of defense on the weekend after the shooting that it would be a greater tragedy to lose their program of diversity? >> there is nobody less politically correct then senator moynihan. i strongly support the department's that focus on it. >> i appreciate it. this is about defeating our adversaries. >> i disagree that it may not be about political correctness. we are talking about the fact that we now have to have behavioral indicators. if he has on his car that he was a soldier of all of it seems to be beyond common sense to

think that they're not be able indicators. -- to think that those are not behavioral indicators. would it be important for me to report those as behavioral indicators tax that is not a question of whether or not you're being politically correct. if i am a soldier and as you that question, what do you tell me? >> inflammatory rhetoric. it needs to be reported. our officers are trained to report on that behavior. >> i appreciate that. >> thank you for doing this.

>> i want to think the witnesses for being here today. we appreciate everything you do for the country. that me start with this. as they have mentioned, we have a situation in little rock where two of our recruiters were killed and targeted by someone who had been radicalized. they have been opening about it. that is why they were targeted. under the department of defense, he is not entitled to receive the purple hearts.

could you talk to the joint committee here about why the department of defense has said they are not entitled to receive the purple hearts of? >> this has been a decision led thus far by the department of army. i defer to him. >> thank you. >> this was tragic. a loss of soldiers is a tragic situation. the award of the purple heart is given by statutes. it is to be awarded to soldiers for wounds received us the reaction of any war. the incident in barack is considered a criminal act and not considered an international terrorist act. the secretary of the army cannot award the purple hearts to the soldiers.

>> should information's surface that would change that, the secretary would be allowed to look at it. it is based on that. >> the perpetrator has admitted that it is a terrorist act. he did that. he was trying to kill americans in uniform. he had been radicalized. he is not hiding it. i'm having trouble understanding why the army does not consider this a terrorist attack. >> the secretary of the army did have the information available. however, it still is not deemed as sufficient to name this a terrorist act. i will take this back to the army leadership. >> thank you.

i know the u.s. attorney wanted to try the case but for whatever legal reasons, i am not sure it ended up in state court. it was a criminal matter. certainly the u.s. attorney tried very hard to characterize it as a attack on u.s. soil. i would very much appreciate hearing back from you on this. i know that senator bozeman and i have a bill to try to clarify this. you're sending a very mixed message about the threats we have here. it is a head scratcher. i would appreciate you getting back to me. >> thank you. >> would the gentleman yield?

i want to join with you on seeking clarification. there are too confusing themes when your constituents are falling. the actor was associated with acts of terrorism. i think we can do this in a bipartisan/bicounter manner. respecting the department of defense. this was written by the congress. i would ask that as you take the request back, that the ask for those of us who are from taxes if you had the same pain for many families and find a way not to ignore the department of defense. and find a way to come to recognition.

>> we would get you. thank you. we'll ask if he will yield to me for five seconds. >> thank you. >> we will yield to me for five seconds. one observation. al qaeda is the enemy. this will exclude the pakistani taliban which carried out the times square bombing. it is not just al qaeda. it is other extremist groups

throughout the world. >> thank you. very briefly, i agree with you. it includes pakistan. al-shabab in somalia, they are part of this violent extremism movement. they offer in the united states of america. >> that is where i thought we were. i apologize. >> the administration refuses to understand this and exploits the code words. you use the language identifying the enemy 39 times, jihad 126 times. in 2010, you used these terms 0 times. i have said that we have to be able to identify the enemy if you'll ever defeat them. that is important. in cold war, they conducted

diplomacy on the basis of complete ignorance of the soviet definition of the expression of a " peaceful coexistence." we may dislike each other but we will live and let live. they define it as a form of struggle against capitalism where all forms of struggle are permissible accept all out war. i think we have to identify the enemy. we have to be willing to express these true threat and discuss it in terms better realistic. they refuse to identify and discuss violent islamist extremism. they killed 15, wounded 33. were they motivated by islamist

extremism? >> i would characterize it as their motivations in terms of major hussan, we cannot discuss it. his issue -- he is awaiting prosecution. i would say in new approach -- >> he was in communication with al-awlaqi. >> they are focusing on the behavioral indicators of any individual. these things get report a bad as the best way to prevent these things. this is the focus. they believe it is successful. >> i really just want to make this point. i do not have anything further

from this other than to encourage you. we identified the enemy of this country. let's have the courage to use the terms necessary to defeat the enemy but and for all. we do that by being honest with ourselves in with the american people. >> if you deal to the gentleman from minnesota. >> thank you for yielding. i appreciate the comments regarding the purple heart and why they are not receiving it. i do not understand. i think they are casualties of war on terrorism. i also would like to see the statement bac that explains to me the secretary of the army and why he does not consider two of his troopers not victims --

warriors that were killed in combat. thank you. i yield back. >> thank you. the one to thank you both. thank you for bring us forward. thank you for your service. this would require a yes or no answer. is there a threat to military communities limited to only islamic extremist? yes or no? i'll start with you, secretary stockton. >> thank you. it allows me to address a couple of the other questions. >> i am not a ranking member within leadership.

i only got five minutes. if you would give a simple yes or no. >> al qaeda, the affiliate's are a primary threat. that is the center of gravity. we recognize other threats. >> thank you. >> in keeping to your yes are no question, i have to say no. >> is there a threat to military communities only limited to islamic extremism? your answer is no. >> correct. >> the tenants' lawyer? -- leutenant colonel sawyer? >> i would agree with the previous panel. >> is the threat to u.s. communities limited to an islamic extremist? >> that would be a no. >> no to that as well.

>> what other violent extremist groups exist? secretary stockton? >> i prefer to take that for the record and go into detail. >> thank you. >> i would have to follow his answer on that. >> lieutenant colonel sawyer? >> we have seen a proliferation of other movements. we recognize other threats confront the united states as well. >> thank you very much. >> i would have to say no. >> the question was is there a threat to military communities only limited to an islamic extremist and your answer is no, correct? lieutenant colonel? >> i would agree with the other panelists.

>> we a seen a proliferation of other movements that share the al qaeda islamic faith. it is characterized by their members. that is the reason why my answer is no. >> thank you, a gentleman. it has been said here today that there were in the 1990's white extremist. would you agree that skinheads and white extremists no longer exist and are not a threat to this country or our military bases? secretary stockton? >> they are likely to still be a threat. >> mr. stuteville? >> my answer would be no. >> mr. sawyer? >> i would refer that question to the record. >> would you say they exist? >> yes. >> thank you. i went through those questions because what we were told as members -- the topic of this hearing was "homegrown terrorism, the threat to military communities inside the united states." it does not say "islamic anywhere in here. budget cut effects in this by our environment we are all facing -- there is included in the sequestration the possibility of cutting the military. how would these cuts affect the

work you need to do? >> thank you for that question. to sustain the progress we have under way, but also to accomplish in new starts we have been able to launch in the current fiscal environment would be put at risk. secretary mendez made it clear that national security would be at risk with sequestration. >> mr. stuteville? >> i second those comments. >> lieutenant-colonel sawyer? >> i would completely concur. >> win dod began to estimate the cde and the violent behavior of trendy throughout the services, how important is it to make sure we do not find stereotyping based on race, religion, or at this is the? --ethnicity? what steps will you do to make

sure the project ethnicity. what steps will you take to make sure there is no stereotyping and targeting? would you do? >> we have a white house directed review underway to address the challenges. we are in it for the long haul. we are doing what we need to do to sustain those standards in the future. >> i yield back the balance of my time. >> i recognize the gentleman from michigan, mr. walberg, for five minutes. >> a thank you to the chairman and the panel or being here. i apologize for not hearing some of the question that went home. let me ask lieutenant-colonel sawyer -- to what extent is al qaeda at targeting military committees in the u.s. and is this trend increasing? >> sir, it is a difficult question to answer in terms of whether there is direct targeting from abroad. 56% of direct attacks against

the military for the past 10 years since 9/11 have been by passive radicalization. the fact that i al qaeda is perpetrating their ideologies is they are identifying as the military as a prime target and a legitimate target. it allows these individuals to seek that out and understand why the military is such a target. >> the trend is increasing? >> yes, sir. it has been persistent. it has increased since 2007. >> that would be equal -- there would be an increasing trend as well with other radicalized, islamic terrorist organizations, including al shabaab and others?

>> yes, sir. >> we are all, i think safely, we can say -- we are all delighted that osama bin laden is no longer anything but room temperature, wherever that room might be. we are glad that he is not the focus or the face of radical terrorism at this point. but in the process of locating him, approaching him, and dealing with him, there are some of us who have some concerns or questions about how it was carried out before and after. let me ask you, colonel sawyer -- was it harmful for the special operations forces

involved in the first 2011 killing of osama bin laden to be personally identified? >> sir, is a difficult question. >> secretary stockton? >> i recommend that approach as well. >> did their public identification danger these unit's members or their families? mr. stockton? >> i welcome to take that in a special session, please. >> let me try one other question. should units involved in such sensitive operations be identified in the future? >> again, i welcome the opportunity to discuss that in post session. >> we will be meeting in closed session after this hearing. the secretary will be available.

>> thank you, mr. chairman. i would yield my time back. >> i would like to recognize the newest member of the committee and one of the hottest working in california. >> thank you, mr. chairman. thank you for this opportunity. it has been a very interesting hearing. there are so many things i am disturbed about, particularly with the fort hood massacre and the failure, in my opinion, of properly taking disciplinary action against major hasan. i do not think it was about political correctness. i think there were so many indicators and policies that, i believe, were probably already in place that were just not adhered to. the fact that the guy was an

army psychiatrist, he had been transferred, he had a bad performance evaluation, and yet nothing was done. i am happy we have new policies in place where some of these indicators will be more recognized, but i still believe there was a failure. there were policies already in place the were not adhered to. that is really the huge part of the tragedy that i am disturbed about. my question is going to be -- i believe it was said that all threats regardless of religion and theology are what we need to be paying attention to and if we just are focusing on certain particular ideologies and words, we are exposing ourselves to threat. i am concerned about the

military families and the military bases. out in california, my district includes the los angeles airport space. in the community of san pedro, we have housed military families for ever. we have a navy family housing there. we have air force housing. my question is going to be what are we doing and what can you tell me we are doing to protect the family's who live in our communities, the kids going to school in our schools -- are we paying attention to the risks and dangers that the families of military have in these identified military housing projects in committees do out

these projects throughout this country? >> i would like to say a few words and turn it over to my colleagues. i have regular meetings with sherrif baca. we are focused on this challenge. between law enforcement and our installation commanders so we can take care of military families as well as personnel, on bass, beyond the perimeter, and in uniform. that is part of our area of focus. >> i refer to our threat awareness and reporting programs throughout the morning. we make that training available to family members as well. the primary focus of the training is for soldiers and civilians, but we have put that turning on line so that any dependent with a common access card can access that training through the training center on line. we make it available for

dependents should the situation warrant. there is an auditorium at the installation to allow that. we have systems put in place, including the "eye watch" program. it is a little bit like the "see something, say something" program. >> thank you. my colleague, mr. richardson, alluded to what congress would be making about budgets. it seems that all the recommendations will be dependent on budget. can you tell me what the sequestration -- what kind of an effect that will have, particularly on base security? >> i would like to take that for the record and give you a detailed response. >> thank you. let me just add -- are we also working with schools who have

these kids in their schools? are we working with teachers, counselors who also may be able to identify some of the behavior we are talking about? maybe we are only targeting the adults who exhibit that kind of behavior. >> community engagement has a special focus on schools. we are taking that part of the overall strategy very seriously. >> thank you very much. i yield back my time. >> i recognize the chairman of the oversight subcommittee, the gentleman from texas, mr. mccaul. >> fort hood is right outside my district -- just north of my district. i went to the funeral services for the 13 slain soldiers with

the combat boots and the rifles and the helmets. you are very familiar and aware of all of this. it was very emotional. at that time, we did not really know the connection between major hasan and al-awlaqi. we still do not know how much of a connection there was. i do recall asking soldiers who were wounded what did he say when he shot you? bay said, "alluah akbar." at that time i realize there may be something more to that case than just a murder case. since that time, i think senator lieberman came out with an excellent report outlining a lot of this investigation. i worked in the justice

department's joint terrorism task force. i understand how this works. when it came to my attention that there was information that major hasan was communicating with al-awlaqi, perhaps the greatest terrorist threat while he was alive, over the internet, and the idea that that information was not shared with fort hood. i asked a general cohen at the ceremony, "would you not have like to know more about this guy? you may want to take a look at him. keep an eye on him." what i would argue is the greatest attack on american soil since 9/11. i think in the reports that

senator lieberman issued, the fbi said that is our boy. that was their response when they saw a major hasan being arrested. my first question is why it was that information not shared democrat it could have prevented this attack. what are we doing to make sure this never happens again? probably the best person would be, i guess, mr. stockton. >> i will start and invite my colleagues to add more. first problem, the most severe problem, is that personnel in that joint terrorism task force did not understand the duty to share this information when there is what, we call, a department depends nexus. department of defense nexus. our information director at fort hood needed to know the

information that the jttf had, and they needed to understand that they have a duty to share that with us. second, we did not have the kind of personnel or around the nation from the department of defense in the joint terrorism task force to build the habitual relationship, to build the practice of sharing that would ensure that the base commander was kidding the information needed. finally, we need to ensure it is not happening by onesies and twosies. we get information from the fbi that is widely distributed so everyone is getting what they need in a timely and effective fashion. >> we cannot change what happened in the past, but i sure hope that we fixed that problem. the way this can was kicked down the road, no one wanted to deal with that. we always talk about political

correctness. this ipo