al qaeda was easy and defeat. we had to show the population was light and make the population feel safe turning against them. as soon as we did that the house of cards collapsed which is why i'm reasonably confident with regard to al qaeda in the long term. i think the ideologies of basically attractive to pretty much everybody. the only thing that could happen that would sustain that is ideology over the long term would be if we were to treat al qaeda as a competitor and make bin laden and pump up the che guevara value of ideologies. unfortunately some of the things we have done since 9/11 have done that but i think there's still time to calmed down, take a deep breath and i think that this with appropriate control measures which will include shooting bad guys with appropriate control measures will appropriately by a natural death. >> let's talk in detail about the campaign plan and iraq. you are best known to this audience and to the world as one of general petraeus's key advisers putting that strategy together

and said al qaeda muslims should not support al qaeda and specifically contradicted al qaeda as arguments about jihad and the validity of terrorism as a struggle so people in the west say where are the muslims? the haven't stood up and spoken out against al qaeda. they have. it happened in 2005. it's never happened again across the muslim world so what i would suggest is al qaeda has lost a lot of ground since 1911. the leaders are looking over their shoulders looking scared and a lot of cases and the fact they have not been able to mount a successful attack on the united states since 9/11 isn't only because of the sheer brilliance of the counterterrorism issues. [laughter] but also that lost a lot of support. people don't support their agenda at the moment. >> take that a little further if you would. there has been a lot of commentary by people who look carefully at al qaeda. lawrence wright is an example, arguing that our enemy is made mistakes as severe as the ones we've made that everywhere al qaeda has a foothold it's ended up alienating people. that was true in iraq and across the m

provide intelligence to al qaeda abroad? or stage an attack on americans at the direction of terrorist groups. reports indicate that etim's philosophy has dramatically evolved as a result of their training and cooperation with al qaeda and the taliban over the last several years. according to terrorism expert rohan gunaratna, an expert on the etim, he said in the post-9/11 era, etim began to believe in the global jihad agenda today the group follows the philosophy of al qaeda and respects osama bin laden. such groups that believe in global jihad do not confine their targets to the terrorists they seek to control. the etim presented a threat to the chinese as well as western targets worldwide. without detailed information about each detainee including a threat assessment, the american people cannot be expected to kohl toll rate trained terrorists being released into their community. that is not the transparency or the sound judgment eric holder promised to bring to the justice department when he appeared before the house comm

not only for al-qaeda. every time j.i. does a bombing in indonesia their public approval rating drops dramacally is nonbelonging to the mass muslim organizations. so it's when people leave the mosque that they become radicalized. i think that shows you that the movement is losing steam ideologically. having said that, that doesn't necessarily mean it's going to disappear and fade away overnight because a lot of these movements can be sustained more easily as an internal network than they can as a mass movement. there's a researcher at the naval postgraduate study where he shows insurgencies end slowly where you drive the insurgency down to a point where it becomes harder and harder to find the insurgents and then they can stay at that low level for a very long time. and if the pressure is relaxed or the situation changes they can come back. so i think the threat of al-qaeda will continue to go down. it will reach the point where it's no longer threatening national society or individual state but it's still a threat there i

about the linkage between it tell the bad and al qaeda. there have been people in recent months -- that taliban and allocated. there are people in recent who have said that it is possible to break off that taliban to cooperate with us. he made very strong statements about your skepticism -- you made a very strong statements about your skepticism about our ability to do that, to break the taliban from al qaeda. not so long as they think they are winning, i want to ask you did speak in the open to the tally bad-al qaeda -- taliban-al qaeda a linkage. >> it is somewhat to the taliban, but it is other organizations there. with the taliban, they do have a bank -- link, and i don't think any reason to turn their backs on al qaeda. therefore i don't think there is a motivation to do that. what is probably more important is that i don't believe that the taliban or a single cohesive organization -- they are more a confederation of small entities. many of which are absolutely motivated by regional financial or almost warlordism. they don't have a la

and al qaeda kills servility in spirit to the al qaeda thought people are terrorists. but these people who just defend their country, who want to be free, they are for me freedom fighters, resistant fighters. and i'm trying to tell the story of the young resistance fighter, freedom fighter. he is 22 years old. he is a student who doesn't want to make war and the war abroad, and the war happens, and then he says to his two brothers i don't want to fight your i want to make my exams. i want to be a student and later i want to be teacher, professor. and he doesn't participate in the fighting. and then after three years in 2006, his brother is coming home and in the morning he is shot down by an american sniper. and he said together with his younger brother and they are as every human being there, extremely sad. and they say we don't want to participate in this war. we will continue our study. and he takes his little brother. they make everything together whatever they can. and six months after the death of his other brother, it's in january, the house is attacked by ameri

talks about the taliban's control of the opium trade and the financing of terrorist groups like al qaeda. the half king in new york city hosted the event. gets 45 minutes. >> thank you all for coming. so i would just read a quick passage from chapter four, and then do my little routine, my talk. >> this is a chapter called the new taliban. win in game for the taliban's treasurer, he was hurtling down an isolated smugglers path in a rocky wasteland known as the desert of death. he traveled in a four by four with the regional taliban sub commander. after passenger was one of the biggest heroin smugglers. it was december 19, 2006. unbeknownst to him, a rural air force airplane had picked up his trip when he spoke earlier on a satellite telephone. according to british officials, the spy plane made contact with the u.s. special operations teams hunting high-value targets. the raf reached out to a military intelligence unit tracking military. once again for he was on phone, a u.s. warplane took off from back ran instead to haman. the four by four was obliterated in a flash. they never knew wha

in addition to trying to escape from prison, al qaeda members communicated with confederates while in prison. it's my understanding that one was involved in plotting the 1993 world trade center bombing while in custody in at ka state prison. in addition, -- at attica state prison. in addition, another prisoner issued a fatwa while he was in prison. it emerged later that with the assistance of his lawyer, rahman continued to send instructional mess -- messages to the egyptian terrorist organization. in 2004, nbc news reported that despite their incarceration in max couple security conditions, convicted world trade bombers were communicated by mail with the terrorists in madrid, spain, where many, many people died in that attack. there would certainly be strong reasons to believe that detainees currently held at guantanamo, known to riot and grossly abuse prison guards, would use their access to counsel and investigators in order to convey messages to their allies. i'm concerned about the extra cost that would be incurred in preparing prisons and courthouses for trials. i understand the

and as far as al-qaeda is concerned the real al-qaeda, the bin laden, their operation capabilities that have been eliminated a long time ago. they've made speeches, but they have no direct contact. the real terrorists are everywhere in this world. this terrorist ideology has been globalized. and this terrorism is everywhere. in afghanistan. in iraq. in western europe. >> you actually make the point here afterwards. the majority of terrorist movements are worldwide. >> 35 of 48 terrorist organizations have nothing to do with islam. a long time in a trial against terrorists. it was the red army faction. nothing to do. >> well, i just feel compelled to say this partly because i have been edified by last month's author. this great new book out called selling piece which is basically a history of the cold crisis -- of confusing this with somebody else. thank you. he should know. the crisis. the history of the cold war in the middle east. when he was here speaking he noted that, you know, it was american foreign policy, official policy and israeli policy for a very long time to build up the m

and also not to provide a base for al qaeda in iraq. i fought against al qaeda, which is dedicated to starting a broader war. so, whatever the merits of the decision to invade iraq in 2003 -- and rational people can disagree on that, i think it is hard to make any argument except that an american commitment to maintaining and preserving the stability we bought at such great cost of the past several years is in the interest of the 19 states and of the world. host: the me ask you specifically about this area you know well. it is sunni triangle. what is it like there today? guest: it is very different from what it was when i fought there. in august last year -- a host: where is it on a thismap? guest: it is in the south of iraq. it used to be calm -- it was the triangle of death, now increasingly called the triangle of love. violences down, four down from what it was. it is still for american advisers to help the security forces develop and continue to build the fragile stability still growing there. host: new castle, delaware, good mornin

>> i wouldn't start to guess as to why al qaeda does what it does. and without acknowledging what we have done in specific cases, clearly our efforts to target al qaeda have not been exclusive to capture and kill operations. we have also been very interested in trying to shut down their ability to produce propaganda and recruit people via the intent. so have we worked in that area, yes, we have have we had success in that area? yes, we have. don't know why that's not the reason we are having claims of this. >> could you give us a status update in the flag ship you have been following and explain what procedures you might enact? this secretary and the chairman last week outlined a quail and prayer procedure. has it been done? will it be done? >>i know there's great fascination about this one ship out there that we have shown some interest in. we have been interested in this one ship but we've been interested frankly in multiple ships, north korean ships for some time, that proceeded that. frankly. under psi we had an obligation and interest in trackin

government leaders have come out and made clear statements condemning these attacks, blaming al qaeda, blaming these extremist elements. frankly, their support will continue to wane. we continue to work hard working with the iraqi security forces to go after al qaeda, who is still attempting to reestablish themselves in a bigger way. we are working with them. part of that is outside and desert and other places. we are also working hard to shut down the borders and make it difficult for foreign fighters to flow in from syria. then has been reduced significantly. we continue to work hard to ensure that continues to be difficult for them to execute. >> talking about the tensions between the central government in baghdad and kurdistan, how do you see the future? >> again, it is a regional force. it is a force that right now is responsible for security internal to me krg. there are discussions that there will be two divisions formed as part of the iraqi army. that is part of the nosh nations that are ongoing -- that is part of the negotiations that are ongoing. that will be part of the dis

it was damaging to the united states -- and it made possible for the al qaeda ties to know how we were intercepting their communication. we might be the speculate that we had been able to catch even more al qaeda senior managers then we have is, in fact, the secret had been maintained, but it was not, and "the new york times" made a decision, and my own personal view is that that damaged our security. >> a question came from the audience about one of your previous responses. was not one man warning the white house for months about an attack? >> that is not my recollection, but i have not read his book. [laughter] >> we have a couple of questions about guantanamo bay. first of all, what would you say to those who want to close guantÁnamo? >> hmm. [laughter] the guantÁnamo issue is a serious issue, and i do not mean to downplay the significance at all. if we had not had guantÁnamo, we would have had to take captured terrorists, people we picked up on the battlefield trying to kill americans, and bring them to the united states, and that created all kinds of problems, because once they ca

the problem being al qaeda. if in fact there were not parallel efforts and sufficient progress being made on the other side of the border. i again want to take the opportunity to salute the efforts of the pakistani mill stair, our counterparts, on what we have all recently seen taking place across the border in that country. in a very real way, i believe they achieved operational surprise, which is really difficult in this day and age with constant media coverage and the speed of the internet. but i think they achieved operational surprise because they did what they're doing now from a standing start. there was no threats, there was no buildup of military capability, there were no warning shots provided with the forces they had in the field. they simply started going at the taliban and the al qaeda in the swat and they have continued to sustain that effort over time. they have sustained it with forces off what they call their eastern border and the general would say, i am recognizing that we're accepting risk he

because we were attacked by al qaeda. we were attacked by osama bin laden. we were attacked because al qaeda had sanctuary in afghanistan, and instead of going into afghanistan the way we should have, we shortchanged that mission that i voted to go into and turned around and went into iraq and we had president obama with his constant focus on iraq lead us to a very dark period, very dark period in our history, where we lost thousands of our soldiers, thousands more are wounded, and you all know the story of the torture and all the rest that accompanied this and led us to a place where america has lost its standing in the world. this president inherited two wars -- yes -- he's trying to end one and refocus another. and he inherited the worst recession since the great depression. i call it the great recession. and he also has to cope with threats from north korea, iran, from pirates on the open seas, instability in pakistan and then on top of it all he's facing and we are facing a health threat from the swine flu so he comes to us with an emergency spending bi

and it demonstrates to al qaeda we are not intending to see this new strategy through, end quote. it could hamper u.s. strategy goals in the entire region. rather than focusing on an exit strategy, we should instead be focused on working with the obama administration to provide the necessary flexibility to craft policies that offer the best chance of success while ensuring congressional consultation and congressional notification. the underlying bill provides this balance and that's why chairman skelton, ranking member mckeon, chairman berman, and i ask our colleagues to support u.s. efforts in afghanistan and oppose the mcgovern amendment. the chair: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: i yield myself 15 seconds. mr. chairman, all we are trying to do is to fill in the holes of the strategy that president obama has already articulated. i think the american people would welcome that. i think the afghan people would welcome that. the notion that we are sending our men and women into harm's way without a clearly defined mission which incl

>> they could be al qaeda. they could be shiite extremists. they could be sunni extremists, but i would say they would not be connected, and not have a lot of robust capability but would still potentially conduct some attacks and some activity over time. i think we have to have the iraqi security forces prepared to deal with this type of threat. >> we have time for one more. why don't you close it, andrew? >> i am wondering if you could tell us something of your personal feelings today. this is your third stint and your the division commander. then you are back as the corps commander, and now as the top commander. s he watched developments today and saw the celebrations -- as you watched developments today, what has been your overall sense and what has been dominating your thoughts? >> i would thank you for the question. i would say that i really look back to 2006 as the -- when i first got here as the corps commander when these sectarian balance was so hot -- when these sectarian violence was so high that it was hard to see a way out. today,

al qaeda and other extremist groups one of the things that is so confusing when you try to explain this situation there is so many different groups operating along the border in some areas people who are involved in the drug trade are just local thugs and local criminals and in a lot of cases they are referred to as the taliban by the locals but there it only have a connection which is the money they may pay into them vocationally but they're not from the original taliban burma you also have the pakistani extremist groups and also the islamic movement of the uzbekistan we do not hear about that much they try to talk about uzbekistan and put in place a taliban style government but the imu is very important in the drug trade. interpol believes they control as much as 70% of the herald been coming out of afghanistan and reaching the streets of europe. we're talking billions of dollars every year that they profit off of their work very close with the al qaeda and always have and what my research has found is that al qaeda and the imu come into the trade as the drugs reach the borders. the t

or our targeted airstrikes against terrorists in pakistan could be dubbed recruitment tools for al qaeda since both policies involve planning use -- planting u.s. forces in muslim nations to fight jihaddists. this idea is the latest incarnation of what jeane kirkpatrick dubbed blame america first mentality. it makes excuses for the terrorists. recall that al qaeda was sweulg its ranks throughout the 1990's before the war on terror and well before the prison at guantanamo was even created. during that decade it struck the world trade center, the khobar towers, the u.s. embassies in kenya and tanzania. in october 2000 it attacked the u.s.s. cole off the coast of yemen. by the time the 19 hijackers boarded the four planes that crashed on september 11, 2001, al qaeda already identify numerous grievances with america, including its contempt for western culture, equal rights for women, and men and our support for free speech and exchange of ideas. i've sent a letter to the national security council asking for evidence that keeping guantanamo bay open has created more terrorists than the facili

the central front now in the war against al qaeda. and it is absolutely clear that the battle over there has a profound impact on the national security of this country. this bill gives our troops over there, the resources and equipment they need to fight the fight and defeat al qaeda and protect us against the violent extremists in that region. and the battle in pakistan, they are funding over there. on the subcommittee portion of our mark on the terrorism subcommittee, we are focused on three main issues, first of all, support for counterterrorism efforts, the fight against al qaeda and broader counterinsurgency and counterterrorism efforts across the globe. second, the support for innovative new technologies to give the troops the updated equipment they need to best fight those fights. and lastly, protect our homeland against unconventional threats. all of these areas are focused on irregular warfare, the emerging threat we face. i want to thank secretary gates for his leadership in funding the money necessary, the programs necessar

and one brigade fighting the taliban and al qaeda, our enemy. their principle defense priority is f-16's which is a combat aircraft. our enemy doesn't have combat aircraft. we don't want to be funding a nation to fight against another ally. we want them to fight with us against our enemy. what this bill does is to enable the children of pakistan to have a decent public education and not be forced to go into the madrasahs where they learn violent extremism against india. this enables the women of pakistan, particularly the young girls, to grow up to be women of influence and power and consequence. this enables pakistan to develop economically, not to use its resources and a military posture against india but use its resources to become a full fledged first world nation. pakistan is our ally and this bill will enable it to stand on its own two feet. not to be able to fight india. not to be able to engage in nuclear proliferation, but to help us fight against the forces of violent extremism. pakistan is a valued ally. this will enable us to give th

to disrupt, to dismantle, and to defeat al qaeda. i agree with him on those goals. but success requires a sustained commitment and sustained support for both the mission and the brave americans and afghanis carrying it out. our strategy is having -- meeting with success, yet the mcgovern amendment is already looking for an exit strategy. this amendment sends a terrible message about u.s. resolve to both friends and foes alike. we are not alone in this concern is precisely why the obama administration also opposes the mcgovern amendments stating that the mcgovern amendment, quote, would demonstrate a lack of commitment to the new strategy. it will signal to our afghan partners that the u.s. presence and efforts in the country are fleeting. and it demonstrates to al qaeda we are not intending to see this new strategy through, end quote. it could hamper u.s. strategy goals in the entire region. rather than focusing on an exit strategy, we should instead be focused on working with the obama administration to provide the necessary flexibility to craft policies thatffer t

and we certainly don't want a new nuclear power called al qaeda. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from california reserves the balance of his time. the gentlelady from florida. ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you, mr. speaker. i'd like to reclaim my time and thank you to all of the wonderful people who came to my aid. the republican substitute, as i was saying, mr. speaker, also fully funds the administration's request for the critically important new pakistan counterinsurgency capability fund, pccf. forging an effective partnership with pakistan's military and intelligence apparatus has not been a straightforward affair. although the united states has enjoyed some success, our efforts have also been hampered by a series of exceptionally difficult problems. one is a matter of a threat perception and divergeans strategic priorities. with pakistan almost obsessively focused on their traditional rival in india. another problem is the legacy of mistru

iraq -- by al qaeda in iraq or other groups. if those issues get resolved, then i think you will see a further normalization of the security atmosphere inside iraq. >> of iran, over the past few weeks, we have seen a horrifying scenes. we will not forget this. let me say we shall do everything in order to identify the exact number of victims, who goes but those were, how they dealt with those demonstrators. iran cannot count on the world community taking -- and turning a blind eye to this. we are able to see this. my own experience tells me that is so important that when you're in this situation, other people in the world are knowledgeable of what is happening to you. in respect of of that, the question is on -- on the other hand, those in iran who would like to have a different system. we would like to have a diplomatic solution to preventing iran from gaining possession of a nuclear weapon. i completely agree with the president. we have to bring russia and china alongside in order to see to it that it is brought about. i think

al qaeda killed nearly 3,000 people on that day. of the victims for innocent men, women and children from america and many other nations who had done nothing to harm anybody. and yet, al qaeda chose to ruthlessly murdered these people, claimed credit for the attack, and even now states their determination to kill on a massive scale. they have affiliate's in many countries and are trying to expand their reach. these are not opinions to be debated. these are facts to be dealt with. make the mistake, we do not want to keep our troops in afghanistan. we see no military-- we seek no military bases there. it is agonizing for america to lose our young men and women. it is costly and politically difficult to continue this conflict. we would gladly bring every single one of our troops home if we could be confident that there were not violent extremists in afghanistan, and now pakistan, determined to kill as many americans as they possibly can. but that is not yet the case. and that is why we are partnering with a coalition of 46 countries. a

al-qaeda of the arabian peninsula and an affiliate group of al-qaeda began to launch attacks throughout the kingdom. and it was at this point that the saudis realized their support for islamist organizations for violent organizations was a liability. so they began to cut back and as they began to cut back, specifically, with hamas, iran rushed to fill the void. and began to provide hamas with more funds and more assistance and then by the time the elections took place in january of '06 and sanctions were put in place by the west, it was iran that completely filled whatever, you know, hamas was not getting from outside actors. >> i'll ask you one more question and then i'm going to begin to go to the audience for questions as well even though i have about 30 more questions here and about 40 more in my head and that is you also have at this point and the interesting predicament that saudi arabia and

what's wrong with guantanamo is that it is a recruiting tool for al qaeda and other terrorists. that isn't just my opinion. it's the opinion of military leaders based on their experience actually fighting wars in afghanistan and iraq. the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff mike mullen said the concern i've had about guantanamo is that it has been a recruiting symbol for those extremists and jihaddists who would fight us. that's the heart of the concern for guantanamo's continued existence. general david petraeus said guantanamo is -- quote -- "a symbol that is used by our enemies to our disadvantage who beat around the head and shoulders with it." defense secretary robert gates said closing guantanamo is essential to national security. it has become a rallying cry and recruitment tool for our enemies. of course skaoeul is entitled to his -- of course senator kyl is entitled to his opinion and i respect him very much and count him as a friend, but we don't hear evidence to support his opinion, certainly not evidence that compares with those that i've quoted here, starting with

these are folks who have not studied al qaeda. for example, they talk about spain being returned to the caliphate. so you can say that the ethnic cleansing of middle eastern jews would be significant to satisfy al qaeda, but only if you do not know their claims on spain. if you read carefully, france, as well. >> we know that the prime minister in israel made a speech over the weekend. there is a headline in the new york times, jimmy carter in gaza, urging hamas to go towards acceptance. guest: i wish there were something encouraging about hamas and their policies, but here is an entity devoted to the ethnic cleansing of all jews, and wherever we have seen that in a we have seen genocide, as well. their position when israel pulled out of gaza was to declare that tel aviv was also occupied and they were going to try and kill as many israelis as possible and kill them all until tel aviv was also under hamas control. caller: i would like to remain to remind the american people that the u.s. trained russians in afghanistan. so we have

to disrupt, to dismantle, and to defeat al qaeda. i agree with him on those goals. but success requires a sustained commitment and sustained support for both the mission and tra

it would be a reduction or a complete elimination of al qaeda in pakistan where they mostly are now. they would be reducing their ability to operate transnational lee or to cooperate with taliban. i think it is a return to stability in their victory against their internal insurgency. they do have a functioning government with a strong history. if they continue twith their counter insurgency campaign, it will look like that. afghanistan has much further to go. their infrastructure is fifth worst in the world. there is not much to build on physically. i think we achieved a level of security that allows each of the areas to include those currently challenged by the taliban to bring in government that might be locally based but is linked to the national government so when they think of the change they might think locally, and it may be tribal or in a village, but when it goes up the chain is recognized as going up to the national government. they are not challenge to the point where they have a taliban shadow government. i think the other aspects -- rather than -- the challenge is to mak

, some in the muslim world question that if it was al qaeda, there were lured rumors. he said this is the fact. 3000 of my citizens have been slaughtered. that is why we are in afghanistan. i think he tried to be very direct when he said this is the priority of the american president, to protect american lives. but i think he fails by reaching out and trying to widen the distance between the muslim communities and extremists, that is the best hope, is to isolate. and al qaeda -- i think it is no coincidence that ayman of zawahiri and osama bin laden -- i think given their statements, their most nervous about the president's speech because he was trying to bring people over to the american side, to the west cost side, and to make sure these people are isolated would make clear that there is no justification for the slaughter of innocents. he said if you shoot rockets at women and children, you do not claim moral authority, you abdicate it. so i think he was very consistent there. host: one moment from the speech yesterday that lasted just under one hour, 6000 words, inc

we heard numerous reports of financial representatives from al qaeda, the i am new -- imu 18 extremist group in eastern afghanistan routinely meet usually in pakistan and the southwest in the tribal areas we have heard about other meetings, they meet routinely to divide up the funds. it is like one of those things to see if the sopranos where they get together and similarly i should add another reason why i find it very similar to the idea these groups being like a crime family is like the new york crime family is sometimes they fight over the spoils. we hear reports of fighting that takes place between the imu and the pakistani taliban. what happens all the time and usually if you start looking into it they are fighting over money. i will come back to the idea. the top smugglers from the cartel is usually the intermediary between corrupt officials in the afghan and pakistani and every the government. what is ironic when i find most surprising is the extent to which insurgents were actually cooperating with government officials and we even heard cases of the police pretending to lose a

we are still in the cross hairs about groups like al qaeda. if they get their hands on these weapons, i believe they will use them. there were six countries 10 years ago that had nuclear weapons. today, they're almost 10. there are over a dozen states that have biological weapons. some of these have ties to terrorist group, including iran and syria. . . many people are still flabbergasted that al qaeda was able to pull off the attack -- the attacks of 9/11. the concern is thick and help somebody or do this themselves without anybody's help, which could make it even more challenging from an intelligence perspective. host: thank you for being with us. >> this is another live look at the u.s. supreme court as the core wraps up its 2008-2009 term. they issued this morning a ruling has that white firefighters in new haven, conn. were unfairly denied promotions because of their race, reversing a decision that sonia sotomayor endorsed as a appeals judge. new haven was wrong to scrap a promotion exam because no african-americans and only to spend our

but as we have seen from a tax and al qaeda planning and activities across the middle east and europe the danger reaches far beyond the borders of afghanistan and pakistan. afghanistan has become the u.s. military's main effort and central front. president obama author on some 21,000 additional u.s. troops including more than 10,000 marines in the southern part of the country reinforcing our british, canadian, australian, dutch and danish allies. as you know, president obama ordered a comprehensive civil military strategy focused on protecting the afghan people and appointed a new leadership team. our goal is in afghanistan that doesn't provide a sing query for al qaeda that rejects the rule of the taliban and has a government that works for the needs and security of the afghan people who elected it. u.s. government is also sending more than 400 civilians to the country, most of whom will be deployed outside the capitol to the reconstruction teams and various other units laboring to bring improvements to the lives of afghans at the provincial and district levels. i believe with the ne

you talk in your book about an enemy centric strategy that would focus on al qaeda in afghanistan and a population centric strategy that would get you more into nation-building area. and i've been trying ever since the president's speech to figure

according to the experts, guantanamo has become a recruiting tool for al qaeda that's actually hurting america's security. in his remarks this afternoon senator carl challenged the notion singing and by quote an idea that's been floated by the president, senator durbin and others, and of quote, of closing guantanamo. senator kyl didn't mention who these nameless others who agree with closing guantanamo or agree it is a recruiting tool for terrorists might be. let's take one for example. chairman of joint chiefs of staff mike mahlon and i quote. the consort had about guantanamo is that it's been a recruiting for those extremists and jihadists who would like us. that's part of the concern for guantanamo's continued existence. that was a quote from the chairman of joint chiefs of staff admiral michael mullen. retired air force maj matthew alexander led the interrogation team to track down the leader of al qaeda in iraq. here is what major alexander said and i quote. i listened time and time again to foreign fighters and sunnis, iraqis and many states the number one reason they decided to

you have al qaeda, you have piracy, a failed state in somalia, border tensions. and a key instigator of this violence has been the government of eritrea. as the amendment indicates, u.n. report after u.n. report cites eritrea for providing arms and military training to members of the that back and that's an al qaeda-linked group that has been designated by the united states as a foreign terrorist organization. mr. chairman, if you take a look at this picture, which appeared in a u.n. report, this is the actual shabob fighter who shot down a cargo plane with that shoulder-fired missile supplied by eritrea. and the reason we know that is this is the propaganda footage used by this al qaeda-linked organization in order to try to recruit fighters to their goal, and they showed the footage of the successful attack on the cargo plane. now, what if that had been a civilian jetliner? how many lives would have been lost? indeed, our f.b.i. is greatly concerned about somali americans who have gone missing from american cities. they are worried that they have gone to somali

al qaeda and its ideology were incubated in the failed state of afghanistan. the extremists have largely return their attention there in the wake of reversals in iraq. as we have seen from a tax and a cut a planning and activities across the middle east and europe, danger reaches far beyond borders of afghanistan and pakistan. afghanistan has become the u.s. military's main effort and central front. the president has authorized 21,000 additional u.s. troops, including 10,000 marines in the southern part of the country reinforcing our british, canadian, australian, dutch, and danish allies. president obama has ordered a new civil military strategy focused on protecting the afghan people and appointed a new leadership team. our goal is and afghanistan that does not provide is in short to al qaeda, that rejects the role of the taliban and has a government that looks towards the needs and security of the people. the government is all our -- sending more than 400 civilians to the country, most of whom will be deployed for the road construction team and various othe

i still believe that al qaeda and others in the cross hairs host. the program elite -- begins at 11:00 a.m.. host: do you think that 9/11 -- there is confusion about that. everyone saying a lot of stories. what do you think? my last and final statement would be, why would we want to listen to the republicans when it was their policies that got us into the problems that we have now? guest: i don't think 9/11 was a conspiracy at all. i don't understand the conspiracy theories. nearly 3000 people from 80 countries died. there is a real threat out there. there still is a threat. if you read, you'll see that terrorism is still a problem around the world. host: part of the commission's report deals with biological weapons. guest: by a weapons are a concern today. -- bioweapons, these are so common these days. they are worried that this is a virus or bacteria, it is a germ that keeps on giving. it can move between people. just to the sars episode in china. this all -- influence the type of disease that started in hong kong and killed 1000 people. the conce

and the first thing is you are hunting al qaeda, and in the camps in kashmir are the six thing on the list and the guy on the other nsaids that was a six thing on the

both bin laden and khalid sheikh mohammed in afghanistan and remained in close association with al qaeda until his capture in 2004. now, this bona fide terrorist will have the privilege of a united states civilian court trial in the united states. ahmed ghailani was just one of 239 detainees housed in the state-of-the-art facility at gitmo. according to the "wall street journal" today, the government official has said that well over 50 detainees have been approved for transfer to other countries and that negotiations were continuing with saudi arabia to take a large group of yemen detainees. attorney general eric holder estimated yesterday that more than 50 detainees may end up on trial by u.s. authorities. this news comes as more and more americans are growing opposed to the closure of gitmo. in fact, i would have to say this, mr. president, recently we've had more and more polls taken and it's now a 3-1 ratio that people don't want these people tried in the united states, they don't want to have them housed in the united stat states. so we have a real serious problem. not only are we t

and the first thing is you are hunting al qaeda, and in the camps in kashmir are the six thing on the list and the guy on the other nsaids that was a six thing on the list. i don't know how you'd do better than that, but i think that did happen, and it's a recurring problem. >> if i would just add. look, india has shown a great deal of restraint on that point so it's all to its credit. but on the other hand, i would also say that indians have made the judgment that for a variety of reasons it's a less of a priority for them now. it's still a priority, but they have made a calculation, making a point of that is less important than it was in years past their presumably they have made some calculation that serves their interests. again, i think it needs to be committed about the restraint they have made over the last overhears on these points are taken after the mumbai attack. on the other hand i think india has a very good idea of what its own priorities are. i don't want our friends to my right to not have to answer many questions, so i want to throw one question on the table for them.

numerous determinations of been there was no coordination between saddam hussein and al qaeda. do you still maintain that such a collaborative relationship existed, and if so, what sources of information did you have that the cia and other agencies did not have? >> the prime information was from george tenet. there was the senate intelligence committee where they talked about the collaborative relationship, code words sometimes that gets wrapped up in this debate, but there was a relationship between al qaeda and iraq which stretched back 10 years. that is not something i made up. that is not something i thought of. that is something the director of central intelligence was telling us. we know for a fact that saddam hussein was a sponsor, a state sponsor, of terror. it was not my judgment. that was the judgment of our state department. we know that, for example, he was making $25,000 payments to families of suicide bombers who would blow themselves up and kill as many as really is as they could. we know that there -- to kill as many israelis as they could. the notion that, say,

into what has been called a global counter-insurgency campaign against al qaeda and its friends. host: our guest is the retired lieutenant colonel john nagl. caller: i would just like to say that i come from a long line ofgrunts from the war, right down to my brother's in both iraq wars, and i love your analogy of it break humpty dumpty and then putting him back together again. we have the freedom and the united states to say we want to, but like to apologize for the fellow who said you were alive. we also have to do -- who said that you were a liar. we have to do what our commanders tell us to do when you're in the armed forces. i support our troops holy. for my father told me about boosting and the eagle on the flag of world war ii, and have seen these things and seen that it is almost as if the army are imitating these things. it does not sit well with a lot of people. then again, i do appreciate everything you have done in service for this country. i truly think you. i wanted to call in with a positive comment. host: there is this e-mail from tennessee. guest: let me speak fi