that is the metadata program. the change the president made in his speech is that the nsa used to be able to do three hops. the seed number to the bronx to who he called, to the next one. the president made it two hops. seed number, bad guy, to the bronx, and one hopped out. the president also said the nsa has to go to the court every time they make that query. this is unusual. keep in mind what the court is judging. the court is judging whether or not nsa has a reasonable suspicion that the foreign number collected through foreign intelligence is affiliated with al qaeda. it is not you that the court is checking on or your rights that it is double-booking. it is looking over the shoulder of the intelligence professional to see if their judgment was correct. the last full year in which the nsa has records, the yelling through the transom thing happened 288 times. >> people's eyes start to glaze over. you are talking about nuances in law and operations. this is complicated and difficult. let's take it down to funda

collection and metadata. that is why we did it, it was in response to very specific challenge that if we had not dealt with, we would have gone deaf. two,ology change number the nsa spent most of his time watching the soviet union. there was not anyone regardless of your political or suasion that was going to raise that much of a finger in civil liberty concerns, with communications coming out of , in soviet siberia while we are looking for interesting words to pop up on the net like "launch." of 21st century equivalent that isolated signal on a dedicated network being run by an oligarchic superpower, the 21st century movement of that signal are proliferator, terrorist, money laundering, child trafficker, narcotraffickers, etc. e-mails coexisting with your single, unified, global communication structure. there is no way nsa continues to do what it used to do for you if it cannot go out there and be in the flow where your communications and mine are cold legitimately targeted communications. that is just the r

collection and metadata. that is why we did it, it was in response to very specific challenge that if we had not dealt with, we would have gone deaf. two,ology change number the nsa spent most of his time watching the soviet union. there was not anyone regardless of your political or suasion that was going to raise that much of a finger in civil liberty concerns, with communications coming out of , in soviet siberia while we are looking for interesting words to pop up on the net like "launch." of 21st century equivalent that isolated signal on a dedicated network being run by an oligarchic superpower, the 21st century movement of that signal are proliferator, terrorist, money laundering, child trafficker, narcotraffickers, etc. e-mails coexisting with your single, unified, global communication structure. there is no way nsa continues to do what it used to do for you if it cannot go out there and be in the flow where your communications and mine are cold legitimately targeted communications. that is just the r

when section 215 telephone metadata program was first revealed in june of last year, president obama, you may recall, came out and defended the program and said that it was legal and effective. it was subject to rigorous and intelligence said it was fairly confident that he would continue to back them and the program. the debate just took off. we started to see opinion move. in july of last year, the house fell 12 votes shy of ending the program. in the fall, a certain judge in d.c. ruled that the program was probably unconstitutional. in december, the presidential surveillance review board programs hadt the been essential to preventing terrorism. year, obama this was ordering his subordinates to come up with a way to end the programs as they currently exist. is a concrete results of the disclosures leading to debate, leading to a policy change. there have been others. >> can each of you reflate talk about how every person, every consumer, everybody in this ?oom, how does this affect you aside from reading the stories and evoking some sort of emotion, what should they be thinking abou

the government believes that when you are collecting so-called metadata the phone numbers or the call durations and call times but not the actual content of the conversation than taking and collecting that does not require warrant because it is not seen as sensitive as hearing the word of the conversation. we have done reporting as well about collecting that metadata can enlarge quantities have the potential to disclose all sorts of things about who we are as people like our habits, where we shop or what her religion is or what our preferences are and who he might visit at night when our spouses are gone but anyway that is one reason why some people feel metadata deserves more protection than just certainly shouldn't be collected on a vast scale like the government had been doing without a warrant. holding accountable the administration has said repeatedly that it has not found any willful abuse of the authorities by the intelligence community and by the nsa, that when they have mistakes and when there have been compliance violations and there have been serious ones those have been re

metadata information not only foreign citizens which legally they are allowed to do into infinity. we forget this that it's part of the charter to watch and a to watch any foreigner as much as they want whatever signals they can intercept they are allowed by our law but also u.s.. we forget what i talked about at&t, verizon. your carrier has all of this data. they use it to market to you so i would be more comfortable with a private company like at&t and verizon exclusively holding the data in the government exclusively holding the data speaks to a somewhat irrational fear. we are afraid it being misidentified or afraid of becoming a false positive to a government that falling under the lens of him being accused of something we didn't do. be a running thing is the more dated you have the more likely you are to cut down on false positives. that's the funny thing about it. we don't have the level of alarm about private companies have the state as we expressed in the government holding the state it because the responsibility hasn't been as conspicuous on the part of the private sector

that by withholding the existence of this metadata program, the government may have avoided or obtained a short-term tactical benefit in terms of not tipping off terrorists. it missed an opportunity to secure a longer-term strategic goal of winning public support. that is important to the intelligence community and their activities. >> did you want to say more? >> you are a technology expert. you were brought on to help decode some of the slides. some of them are cryptic to say the least. some were amateurish. it will be interesting to see some of the slides. those thought bubbles, are they really part of an nsa slide? i want to pull up one slide. muscular. we should have that ready. >> it is the drying of the cloud. there is a smiley face in the middle. >> i want to say one quick thing. i have seen a lot of government powerpoint. most of them are not classified. one of the things that convinced me that these might be authentic is the crowded, weird graphic design. [laughter] >> here we go. decodingalk us through some of the slides? this one in particular. how does a slide like this lea

encryption is vital but it doesn't shield metadata. it shields content. anonymity tools, you can see -- shield some forms of metadata. it is a threat to freedoms. people warned that investigative journalism is coming to a standstill in the country because of what the government is doing. they mean that is become unnecessary to do that because the climate now because of this ubiquitous surveillance makes it almost impossible to be an investigative journalist because it makes it impossible for people to communicate with one another. >> edward snowden has praised russia "for standing against human rights violations by the powerful." president putin has just invaded and then annexed crimea. the relationship between the united states and russia is increasingly hostile. there is even talk of a new cold war. how worried should we be that mr. snowden is vulnerable to the russian intelligence services to in this increasingly tense situation? >> i need to back up a little bit. there are a lot of issues you're raising. why be in russia? he was on his way to latin am

in the metadata program, which the administration has changed now, and they are essentially going to do it where the phone companies keep the data and you have to get a warrant to do that -- i think that is a very acceptable change. americans needt to know how many americans' data is actually looked at very -- at. the metadata is just the number called from, the number called to, the time and date of that: the duration of the call. it's not any content. now we are going to get a pfizer order to warrant to look at this stuff. americans want to know just how much of our information is looked at, how many americans are caught up in that. that is something americans are entitled to know so they can decide for themselves if this is the right thing to do. i voted against both the 215 and 702 authorizations. i cosponsored transparency amendments to each of those. when they did not pass, i voted against them. that is capturing the internet traffic of people, non-americans, overseas, who we are known to have some kind of terrorism. that is very important that we do that. think it is absolutel

they had to do with the nsa surveillance programs which collected metadata on surveillance programs. mr. gelman is now with time magazine and took part in a discussion hosted by the washington post. they spoke for about two hours. >> we are proud of the recognition and of the coverage. we recognize that there are sharp divisions of opinion about the source of the documents that form the basis of our coverage, edward snowden, and also about our role here at the controversy has been intense at times, and i expect we will explore that today. in the u.s. edition of "the guardian," the board embraced the idea that it is in the public interest. "the new yorker" wrote this -- this was a defining case of the press doing what it is supposed to do. the president was held accountable, for he has to answer questions that he would rather not have, and when his replies proved unsatisfying to the public and in some cases false, his administration had to change its policies. congress had to confront its own failures of oversight. private companies had to rethink their obligations to their customers

wind section 215 telephone metadata program was first revealed in june of last year, president obama you may recall came out and defended the program and said he believed it was legal, it was effective, was subject to rigorous oversight. and intelligence insiders i spoke to said they felt fairly confident he was going to continue to back them in that program. then the debate just took off and we started to see opinions move in july of last year. the house fell 12 votes a shot of into the program. in the fall a federal judge in d.c. ruled that the program was probably unconstitutional. and in december the president's own surveillance review board concluded that the program has -- by january this year obama was ordering his subordinates to come up with a way to end the program as it currently exists. that's concrete results of the disclosure leading to debate, leading to a policy change. and there have been others. >> k. each of you briefly talk a little about about how every person, every consumer, everybody in this room, how does this affect you? how do these revelations affect you?

so, for example, in the metadata program which the administration has changed now and they are going to do, they're going to, essentially, do it where the, if any, companies keep the cay da and that you've -- data and that you've got to get a warrant to do that, and i think that's a very acceptable change, but i think that americans would know, need to know how many americans' data is actually looked at. because the metadata, as you know, is just the number called from, the number called to, the time and date of that call and the duration of the call. it's not any content. at the point where now where they're going to get a fisa order or warrant to look at this stuff, americans want to know just how many, how much of our information is looked at, how many americans are caught up in that. i think that's something that americans are entitled to know so they can decide for themselves if this is the right thing to do. i voted against both the 215 and 702 reauthorizations because i felt there wasn't enough transparency. i had co-sponsored transparency amendments to each of those. when the

it's been revealed that the -- that nsa holds and stores a lot of metadata information, particularly telephone metadata information, on not only foreign citizens, which legally they're allowed to do into infinity. it's part of the charter of the nsa. they get to watch any foreigner as much as they want, however much, whatever untiles they can intercept they're allowed to by our law and also u.s. citizens. we forget exactly what i just talked about. at&t, verizon, your carrier, also has all this data and they use it to market to you. whoa would we be more comfortable with a operate company like at&t and verizon exclusively holing that data and not the government exclusively holing the data, speaks to a somewhat irrational fear. we're afraid of being misidentified, afraid of becoming a false positive to government, and falling under the lens of government surveillance and being accuse canned of something we didn't do. the "ronic thing the more data you have, the more likelihood to cut down on false positives. instead we're more likely to be a potential customer of a product we may not

but can you find a way so that the court is involved in the transaction of getting the metadata.d addresses. so that we can find a terrorist from overseas calling in to the united states. that part of the debate seems to get lost. this is incredibly important as we move forward. >> i've got to stop there. >> doing away with metadata and we have court review and i think it seeks the balance to protect our country and ensure citizens don't feel their rights are being violated. >> thank you both so much. >>> we are monitoring news on malaysia flight 370. a chinese ship has detected pings in the indian ocean. richard quest will join us shortly with china's role in the hunt for the missile jetliner. >>> another shooting at ft. hood. is the country doing enough to protect them. >> we are learning lessons from what's occurred here and minimize chances of this ever happening again. how did i know? well, i didn't really. see, i figured low testosterone would decrease my sex drive... but when i started losing energy and became moody... that's when i had an honest conversation with my docto

that collected metadata of the american phone records. we will have that tomorrow night at 9 p.m. eastern on c-span. >> the muslims have accepted the neveron of islam have bombed any churches, i've never murdered little girls as was done in birmingham -- they have never murdered little girls as was done in birmingham, had never at any time been guilty of initiating any aggressive acts entire 33e during the years or more that mohammed has been teaching us. thatharge of violence comes from the guilt complex that exists in the conscious and subconscious minds of most white people in this country. they know that they have been violent in their brutality against negroes. they feel that someday they will wake up and try to do unto them as they have done onto the whites as the whites have done under us. taught by mohammed to be -- obey the law, respect everyone who respects us, show courtesy, people like. we are also taught anyone in any 62 inflicts or tsolence on us -- or inflic violence upon us, we are within our religious right to retaliate. >> from october, 1963, an interview with ma

you can seeols, some forms of metadata. people warned that investigating -- investigative journalism is coming to a standstill in the country because of what the government is doing. they mean that is become unnecessary to do that because the

should be collecting metadata under specific provision of the patriot act 215, but the broader questionf whether or not we want to empower the government to monitor and surveilled people who are suspected of absolutely no wrongdoing whatsoever, essentially to engage in mass surveillance. is that really a proper function of the state? and beyond domestically, why should one government in particular turn internet from what it was intended to be in its greatest promise, which is a tool of freedom promise next duration and liberation into the most oppressive tool of human control surveillance in history. i don't think anybody thinks there is no legitimate form of surveillance. i think it is perfectly legitimate for the government to people that surveil are in gauge in actual wrongdoing, targeted surveillance of people for whom there's probable cause or some similar standard. but mass surveillance, suspicionless surveillance, of our product medications, i think is without any justification whatsoever. i think the national security state ought to be reined in and converted from a system of ma

that was their interchurch asian -- there to rotation and that they could get large quantities of metadatand apply tests to it in order to gather important intelligence gathering information. did they keep it a secret? they kept it secret they claim because they did not want the people that they need to gather intelligence about who would harm the united states about their methodology. asever, to expect a program massive as that one could remain secret in definitely i think is inappropriate. i asked why they did not think this would eventually become public and their answer was we tried. a very inappropriate answer. i think it has eerie seriously damaged the administration -- barry sears the damage the administration that this was released by edward snowden, who essentially stole the crown jewels of american foreign-policy. as a result, if the said this isn has how we're going to do this. there could have been a great national debate if this is appropriate or not. in an environment of great mistrust. >> can i ask you about the debate? it has arty begun informed legislation. this bill seems

first of all, they don't believe it is just metadata.that -- >> metadata will be used against you for political purposes is what we'll be seeing out of washington, unfortunately. >>> when you weren't watching cnbc back in 1989 you were likely listening to madonna. 25 years ago the original material girl topped the charts with "like a prayer." up next, scott cohn looks back on 1989 and the launch of cnbc. we asked people a question, how much money do you think you'll need when you retire? then we gave each person a ribbon to show how many years that amount might last. i was trying to, like, pull it a little further. [ woman ] got me to 70 years old. i'm going to have to rethink this thing. it's hard to imagine how much we'll need for a retirement that could last 30 years or more. so maybe we need to approach things differently, if we want to be ready for a longer retirement. ♪ >>> if you haven't thought about your taxes until now, you may already have waited too long. >> u.s. airways and america west have sealed the deal. the new company

the measure limits the metadata that can be collected from internet users in brazil.s internet service providers not liable for content published by the users. it requires them to comply with court orders to remove offensive material. this comes on the eve of a major conference on the future of internet governments -- internet governance. workers in panama are seeking a 35% wage increase. the $5 billion panama allow -- panama canal expansion project will be impacted. they restarted work last month after a dispute of a $1.6 billion overrun. this is your latin america report for this one stickered coming up, is the s&p 500's winning streak ready for a breather? that story in just a moment. ♪ just on its00 longest winning streak since september -- just saw its longest winning streak since september. dan, welcome back to "bottom line." the market rotation that we have been seeing over the past few weeks, is that over now? >> it seems to be. there was a question of whether was indicating there was something we needed to worry about. we don't think that is the case. it did

he told everybody about the metadata information. metadata has identifying information on it only.ou called charles, what phone you called from, what phone charles received it on, how long you spoke but not the content. edward snowden says they have the content, they have the content of e-mails and text messages. the nsa says we don't admit we have the content but it is just sitting there. we don't have access unless we get a search warrant for it. in a march 28 letter revealed yesterday, the general admitted they don't get search warrants for it, they rolled through the content of phone calls and e-mails and text messages at their whim. now that's very significant because it is the same who testified under oath that they don't do this. stuart: general clapper may have to take fall for the administration. >> he might. if he escapes without his job with his pension would be a pretty good deal for him because anybody else would be prosecuted for perjury. roger clemens was twice positive for perjury for like a house committee about the contents of his urine. this guy lights we house c

. > that number was -- >> the metadata would have recorded the connection between the u.s.number and the yemen number. >> we have two last questions. ayres.ame is chris gellman.on is for mr. you mentioned the data that you have to protect because you are a target for the u.s. and outside countries. would you do with the data that you consider to be too important to publish? you delete the data? -- do you delete the data? question, thank you very much for getting into the details of this program. return to where we started talking about, we talked about how radically data collection has expanded in the last decade. someone pointed to the intercepts between google centers and the bolt data collection. since data collection has changed so much, should our concept of surveillance and what it means to be surveilled change? were talking about data --ng from a public company private company. we, as americans, have enough our data to private companies will stop should that mean the same thing -- private companies. should that mean the same thing? , for reasons that are obvious, i'm

but the metadata doesn't listen to your conversations. it simply identifies the number, who calls and so on while they put it together and try to identify potential sources i think that is the challenge is do we get over this or not. if we give up too much intelligence capabilities, we lose the war. this is a similar question what is the greatest advantage that we have today. i wish i could answer that honestly, but i think that the united states is multicultural. we have more capability in terms of language, cultural background skills and so on. that is our advantage. but it is mission impossible right now. i hope the nsa survives. i can only hope. we have someone here that knows a lot more about this subject than i do. perhaps i would have to ask him to answer that question. but it goes back to world war ii. actually, in the balkans of the 1940s, what do they make of the 2,671st special reconnaissance brigade? i am sorry but i'm going to confess i don't know the answer to that. what they have been doing in world war ii, and i don't have

and he's now proposed at least to congress that we end the, you know, the metadata collection program. so it's a work in progress, and i think it's too early to judge him. i don't think things are worse off than they were when he became president, but i'm not sure they're as much better than he would have liked. >> just quickly, i think empire is by its nature p tragic. all empires always overreach and undermine themselves, ultimately. having said that, the american empire has been the most benign, the most principled, the most honorable empire if history -- in history. and we have screwed up to a fare three well lots of places and inflicted harm on all sorts of people. but relative to all the other empires in history, we've been pretty good. it goes with the territory that if you project power, you're going to break t

but metadata does not listen to your conversations. and that then they have programs then to put it together to try to identify potential sources. but it's, i think that's the challenge, is do we get over this or not? if we give up too much intelligence capability, we lose the war. what is, this is a similar question. what's the greatest intelligence advantage we have today? i wish i could answer that honestly but i think that, the united states is multicultural. we have more capability in this country from terms of language, cultural background, skills and so on and that's our advantage. but it's, you know, it's, it is "mission: impossible" right now. i hope nsa survives. i like, i can only hope. we have someone here that knows a lot more about this subject than i do. perhaps i would have to ask him to answer that question. but it goes back to world war ii. the cia, actually the, in the balkans in the 1940s, what used to be make of, 2671st reconnaissance brigade. i'm sorry, i will confess i don't know the answer to that. early '40s, w

know, the metadata collection program. so it's a work in progress, and i think it's too early to judge him. i don't think things are worse off than they were when he became president, but i'm not sure they're as much better than he would have liked. >> just quickly, i think empire is by its nature p tragic. all empires always overreach and undermine themselves, ultimately. having said that, the american empire has been the most benign, the most principled, the most honorable empire if history -- in history. and we have screwed up to a fare three well lots of places and inflicted harm on all sorts of people. but relative to all the other empires in history, we've been pretty good. it goes with the territory that if you project power, you're going to break things. and if you do it secretly or accelerately or with -- overtly or with indirect warfare, you're going to break things. and people don't like to be occupy toed by you. and they, you know, imagine if we had afghan troops walking down our streets. we, you know, we'd res

you are part of the president's panel that reviewed our intelligence programs, including that metadata collection program. this past sunday you said that the president's plan of approach were very close. you also said the house plan, you would be comfortable with that. can you elaborate on your comments and give us further insight into this topic? >> yes, sir. my main concern as i sat on the weiew group was how do protect this program going forward. how do we make sure we still program because i believe it is vital for the protection of this country. at the same time, it was absolutely clear that we have lost the trust of the american people and we needed to find a way to win it back. group'sew recommendations for designed to do both that. to win back that trust while protecting the program. the reviewmber, group's recommendations were the government should not hold the data. there should be a court order prior to any query. and who held the data we would leave up to experts. the president's recommendation is completely consistent with the review group's. i actually believe that the ho

we know from the snowden revelations that metadata -- who you are calling, who your e-mails are being sent to, what times, things like that -- but we do not necessarily know under the snowden revelations with the content of e-mails or phone calls is being monitored. lots of americans think that is the case. the literal content other e-mails and phone calls is being captured. and even some people who fear that, they are ok with these programs, because they say, you have to fight bad guys with methods like this. host: jamie in texas, go-ahead. if the i was wondering guest could speak to identity theft insurance? i understand it might be able to refund lost money, limit liability. can it repair my credit damage? can it restore my name if criminal activities were done as me? guest: i am not actually sure about the range of policies now being made available by insurance companies on things like this. it is probably the case that some of the things may be restored, some of your lost assets, obviously cleaning up your record at some level as part of the offering of some of those companies. b

they need a personal counselor to sift through the metadata thrown at them on the site.aches quietly the people feel might be a good match, is that correct? >> exactly right. thank you for explaining that so well. you see most people would like to have some personal help with it, they need some personal help, they are very busy people at this level who are so successful, are very busy, and they need to have somebody else do all the work, really, and so we think turn off your computers, let us do all the work, and we'll make those initial contacts. you will never receive a rejection letter in the mail or rejection on the telephone because we'll set it all up ahead of time. liz: that's good, we don't like rejection, that doesn't feel so good especially when it comes to love. you got the love doctors, transformations can be long and messy, how many clients? what are your numbers so far for paying people? >> we're not putting that number out. let me tell you this, we started january 1st, and we've had an unprecedented response to it and, of course we have 762,000 independent

comply with brazil's laws in the rest of the world too restrictions also placed on collecting user metadata something the n.s.a. has been doing secretly for years it's hoped the two day meeting will overhaul who controls the internet and assigns domain names now currently that's the private of an organization supervised by washington this and the fact that the bulk of the internet traffic from your e-mails to web searches goes via the states i was watching to get its hands on practically any online data now many governments including the u.s. partners in europe want to be one that to be a thing of the past or he's a marine important has more. the united states leads the world in secret surveillance and indiscriminate data gathering but it is brazil that is leading a debate about the future of global internet policy six hundred delegates from eighty five countries are in sao paolo for a two day meeting that focuses on establishing strategic guidelines about the use and development of cyberspace the event is called net moon deol organizers say was created in part due to concerns about governm

you are part of the president's panel that reviewed our intelligence programs, including that metadata collection program. this past sunday you said that the president's plan of approach were very close. you also said the house plan, you would be comfortable with that. can you elaborate on your comments and give us further insight into this topic? >> yes, sir. my main concern as i sat on the review group was how do we protect this program going forward. how do we make sure we still have this 215 program because i believe it is vital for the protection of this country. at the same time, it was absolutely clear that we have lost the trust of the american people and we needed to find a way to win it back. the review group's recommendations for designed to do both that. to win back that trust while protecting the program. if you remember, the review group's recommendations were the government should not hold the data. there should be a court order prior to any query. and who held the data we would leave up to experts. the president's recommendation is completely consistent with the review

comply with brazil's laws in the rest of the world too restrictions also placed on collecting user metadata something the n.s.a. has been secretly doing for years it's hoped the two day net mundial meeting will overhaul who controls the internet and assigns domain names currently that's the responsibility of i can the internet corporation for assigned names and numbers a nonprofit group that works under the supervision and contract of the u.s. government and word snowden's revelations that lead some to question whether the u.s. should have this kind of control over the web the bulk of internet traffic from emails to web searches goes by the states where it could be intercepted that's one of the main things that governments including washington's partners in europe now want to change are important i has more on the on line event. the united states leads the world in secret surveillance and indiscriminate data gathering but it is brazil that is leading a debate about the future of global internet policy six hundred delegates from eighty five countries are in sao paolo for a two day meeting th

that collected metadata on americans phone records. tonight at 9:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. >> for over 35 years, c-span brings public affairs of ants washington directly to you about putting you in the room at congressional hearings, white house events, briefings and conferences. offering complete gavel to gavel coverage of the u.s. house, all as a public service of private industry. we are c-span, rated by the cable industry 35 years ago and brought to you as a public service by your local cable or semi-provider. watch us in hd, like us on facebook and follow us on twitter. >> on monday, the heritage -- held a hold it conference on russian politics and influence. panelists talked about the effectiveness of government backed media broadcasts like voice of america. this is just under two hours. >> welcome. we would ask everyone here if you will check that cell phones have been turned off. it would be appreciated as we prepare to begin. our internet viewers are always welcome to send questions or comments, simply e-mailing us. hosting our discussion today i

he wanted to ask you about the metadata reform.and i know you've been spearheading the effort to find a new model for how that -- we could get the information we need to protect the country, make sure we maintain our privacy protections. and i think the plan the president announced a week or so ago was exactly the right direction to go in. the one difference, i think, substantial difference between what the president has proposed, and now a bipartisan proposal of the intelligence committee, is that the administration's proposal would have the court review or request to query the telephone companies on a suspect number before the search is done. in the absence of an emergency or exigent circumstances. i think that's the wrong approach. there is a bill from the committee now that would

that by withholding the existence of this metadata program, the government may have avoided or obtained a short-term tactical benefit in terms

cybersecurity legislation and proposing bipartisan nice have reform that ends bulge collection of metadatacivil liberty and priest serves a morn capability. the committee will miss you and your leadership. we have you until the end of this congress and we know you will continue to roll up your sleeves and continue the work americans expect from this bipartisan committee. we know that there were many heroes and many people that suffered gray loss that day. we mourn the deaths of ambassador chris stevens, sean smith, tyrone woods and glen doherty and we honor the men and women who acted courageous to save the lives of others. no one left a comrade behind. we owe it to them and countless others to defend america to find out what went wrong to make sure it doesn't happen again which is what we're doing today. the independent accountability review board headed by admiral mike mullen and ambassador thomas pickering completed comprehensive have review of the situation and issued 29 recommendations. the government is implementing those recommendations especially when is it comes to increasing secu

the key thing there was to get the exact metadata of when he had called rosen.they put the screws on him that they would give him a higher sentence if he did not come up with a guilty plea. the press has not yet been trekked the prosecuted. -- directly prosecuted. but these various cases may succeed. there's every reason to think that that will be the next out. >> the director of national intelligence said that people were aiding and abetting and conspiring. anyone who is helping snowden in any kind of way, that would include the lawyers. they could be subject to criminal penalty. that is an incredibly frightening place to be in. >> i was just wondering, what do you guys think makes a good whistleblower? a lot do it out of retaliation. how do you avoid prosecution? >> shallots to know what makes a good whistleblower. >> the most amazing thing is -- and we have discussed this before, it is not that you guys have dealt with this, that should be the norm. the amazing thing is, where are all the other people? the public is being spied on, how many people knew what w

internet company, we have no interest in our privacy when we e-mailed each other with respect to the metadataontained in them come in our phone calls. it is a crazy theory. to come back to the ongoing importance of citizenship, the u.s. still insists that you can listen to anybody else's communications, the content, so long as you're not an american outside the united states. my brits can listen to communications if they wish. >> that is a great argument for universality. that is the good news, that they are making the argument for us. subparte focus on the of the question. i want to get back to the issues you and cannot just raise. in, why do we keep thinking this country at least -- we talk about civil rights, we all believe in our civil rights,. we think we do, across the political spectrum. we think we do. why is that easy for us to think about and talk about, say, of course we have these civil rights, they are important, but at do not translate th into language of international human rights. i wonder if you -- you mentioned in your first comment that one of the things you see as a huge u

track record and the authorization ask every air in the legislation of proposing bipartisan and metadata and increases civil liberties and preserves a capability. the committee will miss your leadership, but we still have you in the congress to know you will continue to row appears these and do the work the american people have come to expect. today as we turn our attention to benghazi on september 11, 2012, we will and other of many heroes in people who suffer great loss. reminded us of ambassador cristina's, sean smith and leon are the other men and women who acted courageously that day to save the lives others. no one left a comrade behind. we are to them to campus others to risk their lives to defend america to find out what went wrong and make sure it does not again. this is what were doing today. the independent accountability review board by mike mullen had a comprehensive review of the situation. the government is implementing recommendations especially when it comes to increasing access security. we in congress have also gone through every aspect. we've run down every allegation

as every year into cybersecurity legislation and proposing bipartisan reform in the collection of metadataand increases privacy and civil liberties and preserves an important capability. the committee will miss you and your leadership that we have you until the end of the congress and we know you will well up your sleeves and do the work the american people have come to expect. as we turn our attention to the attacks in the benghazi on september 11, 2012, we know there were many heroes in people who suffered great loss. ambassador chris stevens and we honor the other men and women whwho acted courageously that dy to save the lives of others. no one left a comrade behind. we only took them into the countless others that risked their lives to find out what went wrong to make sure it doesn't happen again which is what we are doing today. the independent accountability review board headed by the ambassador thomas pickering created a competitive review of the situation and issued 29 recommendations. the government has implemented a recommendation when it comes to the increasing security. in con

the key thing there was to get the exact metadata of when he had called rosen.they put the screws on him that they would give him a higher sentence if he did not come up with a guilty plea. the press has not yet been trekked the prosecuted. but these various cases may succeed. there's every reason to think that that will be the next out. >> the director of national intelligence said that people were aiding and abetting and conspiring. anyone who is helping snowden in any kind of way, that would include the lawyers. they could be subject to criminal penalty. that is an incredibly frightening place to be in. >> i was just wondering, what do you guys think makes a good whistleblower? a lot do it out of retaliation. how do you avoid prosecution? >> shallots to know what makes a good whistleblower. >> the most amazing thing is -- and we have discussed this before, it is not that you guys have dealt with this, that should be the norm. the amazing thing is, where are all the other people? the public is being spied on, how many people knew what was going on in the nsa?

part of that work is to eliminate bulk collection of metadata while maintaining the capability fight will to keeping us and our allies safe. you were part of the president's panel that recently reviewed our intelligence programs including the meta-data collection program this past sunday. he said that the president's plan and the approach were very close to each other. you also said the house plan is adopted that you will be comfortable with that. with that can you elaborate on the conference and any further insights you might have on this topic? >> yes sir. my main concern as i said on the review group was how do we protect this program going forward? how do we make sure we still have his 215 program because i believe it is absolutely vital for the protection of of this country but at the same time it was absolutely clear that we had lost the trust of the american people and needed to find a way to win it back. so the review group's recommendations were designed to do both that. designed to win back the trust while protecting the program and if you remember the review group's recomm