>> i agree with jane harman.i thought that in the cusp or perhaps even in the middle of what the 2012 campaign is going to be, it was a bold statement to make. and a realistic statement. the reality is that israel is in danger of being isolated. and the united states-- with alone with t and i think it is a dangerous time for israel internationally. i think the president is going to europe. he had to have -- he was really forced to make a statement by prime minister netanyahu coming here. and with his invitation from speaker bayne tore speak to the congress. that was going to dominate the discussion. that we're going to have elections in egypt. and we want to preserve and strengthen the peace relations between israel and egypt. and with jordan. and i just think it was, that we have to move forward on this. we have to change. and i think that's really important. and i think it was an important message for him to deliver. >> i was in europe yesterday when the speech was made and the reaction in europe was, finally a

. >> joining me now here in washington, former california congresswoman jane harman, now president and ceo at the woodrow wilson center and former national security advisor steven hadley. we want to tell our viewers we will sit down with the u.s. ambassador -- the ambassador from israel to the u.s. as well as the palestinian representative to the u.s. as soon as they touch base with their homes to get the general reaction from their governments there. but we want to start with you all, who know this area and this region and this decades-long, you know, confrontation there. did the president hit the right pitch? >> i think he did. he started out by reaffirming america's commitment to israel's security, basically said it was ironclad, it was unbreakable, talked about iran and set a very high bar that we will prevent iran from having nuclear weapons. and then he talked about opposing efforts to delegitimize israel, and then as your viewers just saw, he clarified some points that were left ambiguous in a speech in i a way that i think gave real reassurance to israel. so i think he framed i

former congresswoman jane harman helped spearhead the response to the 9/11 attacks as ranking memberhe subcommittee on terrorism and homeland security and joins me now. congresswoman, your reaction to the news today. >> i had a long-scheduled breakfast this morning with the director of national intelligence, jim clapper, who was obviously very tired, and we agreed that the capabilities that we brought to this evolved over three presidencies and all deserve credit, and reflect the reforms we did in 2004, when congress passed the massive intelligence reform act, and that led us, used all of the different agencies that have just been named in your excellent reporting to go after the identity of these couriers, to find their locations, to target this location in a variety of ways, and to take out osama bin laden yesterday. it's a huge victory for our intelligence capability and specifically, the people who did this task, and i just want to say congratulations again to them for the work that they've done. jenna: congresswoman, we're going to discuss this more. we're just watching the pres

i too am particularly delighted to see former representative jane harman here with us as the chairman has indicated she was one of the four authors of the 2004 intelligence reform and terrorism prevention act and worked very closely with us through extraordinarily intense talks if the negotiations that spanned several months. general haydon has given so much work and effort to his country and also was the key behind the ausley year as we drafted that bill and of course as the chairman has indicated has had a stellar career in the intelligence community, and i am confident that all three of our witnesses will help us do the evaluation that we are undertaking today. last week's news that osama bin laden was worked demonstrate exactly the successful collaboration of intelligence and operations that we envisioned and reforming our key capability in the wake of the attacks on our country men en in 2001. this was a great victory for the intelligence efforts and a great blow to al qaeda. but the fact remains that al qaeda isn't going away and that is why it is time for conagra's to examine c

it is good when you walk up to give a speech when jane harman and with a good and callable speaker says don't screw this up. appreciate that. my good friend bud mcfarlane, i am honored to see you here. national security adviser for ronald reagan. thank you for being there. i think paul bremer is in the audience. former ambassador. i don't know if you know that ambassador of my wife in iraq worked with you for quite a while. thank you for sending her of back in one piece. i would like to talk a little bit about where we are. before i talk about where we are i want to talk about where we came from. ten years ago on the date of 911 the intelligence community was very different than it is today. it had suffered huge losses in the 90s. we had cut back in some places. no coverage whatsoever. we closed down shop and a lot of places. they used the intelligence community has the opportunity for peace dividends and the fall of the soviet union. we see leading up to 9/11 with a serious mistake that was. and we saw that the problems that were inherent in the shrinking organization and its ability t

in the testimony last week, i was fascinated at different points our witnesses which were jane harmannd general hayden, suggested it may be as critical accepting the goal of the strength or legitimacy of the d.n.i. that it may be as critical to achieving that goal for there to be adequate support from the president and to a lesser extent congress in a different way, as it is to add onto the statutory authorities of the d.n.i. and i wonder what you think about that. may not be an either/or question but give me the sense of how important the nonstatutory recognition and authority giving for the office is. >> i would agree with that observation that active support from the white house and the congress makes it a lot easier for a director to fill in the gaps of authority and legislation and that would be a good thing. however, i don't think that that is the reason for the congress not to continue to strengthen the intelligence community integration in a way that i think it was designed to do because as i mentioned, administration and personalities come and go but it's the responsibility o

it is always good when you walk up to give the speech when jane harman, who is a good speaker, says, "do not screwed this up." [laughter] i am honor to see the national security adviser for ronald reagan here. thank you for being here. i see paul bremer in the audience -- a former ambassador. my wife worked with you in iraq for quite a while. thank you for sending her back in one piece. we appreciate that very much. i want to talk a little bit about where we are. before i talk about where we are, i want to talk about where we came from. 10 years ago on the date of 911, the intelligence community was very different than it is today. a very different. it had suffered huge losses in the '90s. in some places in the world we had no coverage whatsoever. wheat closed up shop in a lot of places. they used the intelligence committee for the opportunity for a peace dividend and the fall of the soviet union. we saw leading up to 9/11 what a serious mistake that was. we saw that the problems that were inherent in the strengthening organization and its ability to continue to do its mission -- the

it is always good when you walk up to give the speech when jane harman, who is a good speaker, says, "do not screwed this up." [laughter] i am honor to see the national security adviser for ronald reagan here. thank you for being here. i see paul bremer in the audience -- a former ambassador. my wife worked with you in iraq for quite a while. thank you for sending her back in one piece. we appreciate that very much. i want to talk a little bit about where we are. before i talk about where we are, i want to talk about where we came from. 10 years ago on the date of 911, the intelligence community was very different than it is today. a very different. it had suffered huge losses in the '90s. in some places in the world we had no coverage whatsoever. wheat closed up shop in a lot of places. they used the intelligence committee for the opportunity for a peace dividend and the fall of the soviet union. we saw leading up to 9/11 what a serious mistake that was. we saw that the problems that were inherent in the strengthening organization and its ability to continue to do its mission -- the

i was fascinated by different points from witnesses which were jane harman and general hayden, suggest that it may be as critical, accepting the bowl, the strength of legitimacy of intermediate precedents 4 be critical to achieving that goal to the president and congress in a different way to add on to the statutory authority of the dni. i wonder what you think. it may not me and either/or question. give me an impression how the non statutory recognition authority given to the offices? >> i would agree with that observation. active support from the white house and the congress make it a lot easier for a director to fill in the gaps of authority and legislation. that would be a good thing. however, i don't think that is the reason for the congress not to continue to strengthen the intelligence community integration in a way that irtpa was designed to do because administration and personalities come and go but the responsibility to the legislation to establish the structure in accordance with what we have learned over time. what we have learned over time, this is not the lead time the co

i too am particularly delighted to see former representative jane harman here with us as the chairman has indicated she was one of the four authors of the 2004 intelligence reform and terrorism prevention act and worked very closely with us through extraordinarily intense talks if the negotiaons that spanned several months. general haydon has given so much work and effort to his country and also was the key behind the ausley year as we drafted that bill and of course as the chairman has indicated has had a stellar career in the intelligence community, and i am confident that all three of our wiesses will help us do the evaluation th we are undertaking today. last week's news that osama bin laden was worked demonstrate exactly the successful collaboration of intelligence and opertions that we envisioned and reforming our key capability in the wake of the attacks on our country men en in 2001. this was a great vctory for the intelligence efforts and a great blow to al qaeda. but the fact remains that al qaeda isn't going away and that is why it is time for conagra's to examine closely a

i too am particularly delighted to see former representative jane harman here with us as the chairmanhas indicated she was one of the four authors of the 2004 intelligence reform and terrorism prevention act and worked very closely with us through extraordinarily intense talks if the negotiations that spanned several months. general haydon has given so much work and effort to his country and also was the key behind the ausley year as we drafted that bill and of course as the chairman has indicated has had a stellar career in the intelligence community, and i am confident that all three of our witnesses will help us do the evaluation that we are undertaking today. last week's news that osama bin laden was worked demonstrate exactly the successful collaboration of intelligence and operations that we envisioned and reforming our key capability in the wake of the attacks on our country men en in 2001. this was a great victory for the intelligence efforts and a great blow to al qaeda. but the fact remains that al qaeda isn't going away and that is why it is time for conagra's to examine cl

i think i will start with jane harman. >> thank you, alan. welcome to a bipartisan bastion. i'm enjoying my new service here. two things -- in your remarks you did not mentioned the intelligence reform legislation of 2004 but alan ask you about that. it was passed over the implacable opposition of the and secretary of defense rumsfeld, and duncan hunter. it was bipartisan legislation strongly supported and originated in the house intelligence committee, and your predecessor played a courageous role in pushing it forward. my question is this -- director of national intelligence clapper credits the reform legislation for helping him leverage and create this aimlessness that was necessary to put up clues to gather that were the predicate for finding osama bin laden. i think you would agree with that, and i think you would agree that we have to continue to do that and other things going forward. my question is, we seem to be much better at doing that horizontal it, at the federal level. you are a form of -- former fbi guy, and you get the fact that we have to share intelligence

our former colleague, jane harman, going back to the time when president clinton was president, so many people, so many people have been involved in this effort to ensure that we would not face the kind of attack that we did. mr. speaker, i think it's very important to note on this day that we have been successful in the past 10 years. we of course as reports have come forward need to remain vigilant, but i want to extend congratulations to all of those who played a role in ensuring our safety. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from alabama rise? >> to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from alabama is recognized for one min. -- one minute. mr. bachus: i thank the chairman. i just returned from my home state of alabama where we lost over 250 of our citizens. the loss of life would have been much greater had noaa and dr. jane and her wonderful staff not given us an early warning. but some of our storms hit at night and people were unaware of it. and i'm joining several of my colleagues today to