one tourist was slit by the terrorist. on or about november 18, 1997, a statement issued in the name of an islamic group, tried to take prisoners of a large number of tourists to secure the release of the commander of the terrorist group. the statement continued, quote, the rush behavior and irresponsibility of government security forces with regard to tourists and civilians led to the high number of fatities. the statement also warned that the islamic group, quote, will continue its military operations as long as the regime does not respond to our demands. the statement lists the most important demands as, quote, the establishment of god's law, cutting relations with the zionist entity, israel and returning the sheik to his land. on october 13, 1999, a statement in the name of islamic group laider, yasir, who was a co-con spirit ator not named and said the united states, quote, hostile's strategy to the islamic movement would drive it to unify its efforts to confront america's pier asy. in or about march of the year 2000,

fearful, for example, that terrorists -- fear -- afraid of giving terrorists rights and so on. i don't think that's the issue. i think the issue here is the question of whether or not as a general rule it is better to keep prisoners in guantanamo prison than to put them somewhere else. i, for one, don't fear trying some of these people who are appropriately charged and tried in federal court in the united states. but i would also say it is loaded with problems and headaches. and i think that my colleague from illinois would have to acknowledge that the trials that have occurred here have produced some real problems. these are really hard cases to try in the united states. you start with the proposition that they're huge -- there are huge security concerns. it can be done. there will be huge security concerns with this alleged terrorist from tanzania, but it will cost a lot of money in the place where he is tried. and it will pose very difficult questions for the judge, for the people within the courtroom, and the parties to the -- the lawyers in the case, evidentiary questions

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 facility has housed. that was a statement that president obama made. that the existence of guantanamo prison has created more terrorists than the facility has housed. it's an incredible assertion but it's at the foundation of his claim that we nee

containing terrorists at guantanamo, going after terrorists in iraq and afghanistan, clearly somethingorked. and to argue that we would be somehow made more safe in this country by closing down guantanamo i find almost absurd. mr. durbin: with all due respect, the senator failed to answer my question. i asked him this question: if it is a danger to america that if we put a convicted terrorist in prison in our country, if that creates a danger, as you've said repeatedly, in our communities and neighborhoods near this prison or in other places, then i ask the senator from kentucky, what would you do with the 355 convicted terrorists currently in prison and the senator didn't answer. he said we haven't been attacked since 9/11 that. is unresponsive. we know that there are facilities where these convicted terrorists can be held safely and securely. marion federal penitentiary in my own home state has 33 convicted terrorists. i just spent a week down there not far from your home state. there was not fear among the people living in that area because 33 terrorists are being held at marion. do

send to al qaeda and the rest of terrorist network. how can the government guarantee the released detainees won't stay in contact with their al qaeda and provide them with intelligence from within the u.s.? if the attorney general cannot or will not answer these questions, he should not even consider releasing them into the united states. the administration has a moral obligation to share this administration with the american people. over the last month, both the house and senate stripped all funding from these transfers and inserted language into the fiscal year 2009 emergency supplemental bill that would require the administration to provide the american people with a clear plan before any action was taken. since march, i have written the president, the attorney general, the secretary of homeland security asking for answers to these and other questions and i still have not received a single response. i repeat, not a single response after two months of some of the most basic questions about the administration's plans. for weeks i aske

the 9/11 terrorist attacks. and for seven long years, only three individuals were convicted by military commissions at guantanamo. two of those individuals, incidentally, have been released. now, president obama's been clear. it is a priority for his administration to bring to justice the planners of 9/11 and other terrorists who've attacked our country, like ahmed ghalani. now, unfortunately, this issue has become very political and very complicated over the last several months. some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have expressed some things in the senate -- on the senate floor which i don't think are consistent with the security of the united states. senator mcconnell, the distinguished minority leader, and senator kyl, the distinguished assistant minority leader, have argued that we should not transfer suspected terrorists from guantanamo to the united states in order to bring them to justice. they have argued that we cannot safely hold any of these detainees in prison in the united states eve

the terrorists practice this doctrine on a daily basis. and in addition on a regular basis, they abuse our troops down at guantanamo bay. it isn't the other way around. as spokesman for the pentagon stated that 14% of the over 500 who were released from guantanamo bay have returned to some sort of terrorist activity. 14%. some people say, boy, that's a very low recidivism rate. if we think about it, these are mass murdererrers. these are people who want to set out an destroy our country and kill as many americans as they can. do we really want to release some of them on american soil, even if only 14% of them return. and by the way, the people who are released early, these over 500, those were the people who we actually thought were safe. the people who are still there are the most dangerous. one of the people who was transferred detonated a car bomb in iraq. another is now a leading al qaeda operative in yemen. and, as i said before, these were supposedly the safe ones. so what would happen if those currently at gitmo returned to the batt

he was a member of a terrorist islamic organization with dr. al-zawahiri who became second in command of al qaeda. in may 25 of 2007 in a "wall street journal" on-ed, he said the following, quote, in america perhaps the most conspicuous organizations who persistently accuse opponents of phobia is the council of america islamic relations. the observations of mr. tarwik is light compared to recent news report. on may 30, 2009, fox news reported that the f.b.i. was, quote, severing its once close ties with the nation's largest muslim advocacy group, the council on american islamic relations, amid mounting evidence that it has links to a support network for hamas. given that hamas is on the current list of u.s. designated foreign terrorist organizations, this was obviously a serious claim and one which if true would rightly inform a shift in the f.b.i. policy. however, the fox news piece left me with some unanswered questions, questions which given the seriousness of the report necessitated further inquiry. such questions of the executive branch ar

we have 17 magnets to draw in terrorists located around the country. three weeks ago -- or three weeks after i called for president obama and the senate colleagues to go see firsthand the facility at gitmo, attorney general eric holder -- he's our new attorney general, appointed by president obama -- went down there. he came back with a glowing report and the facility is well-run by its current military officers. this affirms what i've been saying all along and that is gitmo is a state-of-the-art facility that provides humane treatment for all detainees. it is fully compliant with the geneva convention. now, when the war supplemental came to the floor in the senate, i was extremely pleased that democrats and republicans in the senate joined together and announced that they would not include the $80 million in the war supplemental to close gitmo. sadly, this bipartisan initiative has fallen victim to partisan politics without any regard for our national security or the wishes of the american people. senator reid, harry reid, declared -- and i agreed wit

currently, the terrorists reward program run by the state department assists in our hunt for terrorists by promising a cash reward or other type of assistance for information leading to the arrest of some of the world's most deadly terrorists. the rewards for justice program established by the 1984 act to combat international terrorism has now paid over $77 million to more than 50 people who have provided credible information to put terrorists behind bars and prevent acts of trim. as a staff member, i helped write the amendment that president clinton asked for when we wanted to offer rewards for persons indicted for war crimes. we also passed legislation under chairman hyde that loosened up this program so we could provide more cash assistance to people who may not be able to read in very rural parts of central asia. the program has been the key to success in apprehending people, including a terrorist who murdered two c.i.a. employees and injured three others in his 1993 rampage outside of c.i.a. headquarters in virginia. the program was also important in nailing yussef convicted of the

we still have the issue of terrorists, radical islamic terrorists who don't believe in the things we believe in and who would like to destroy us and our way of life. and although they use that conflict as an excuse sometimes, it is not the fact that solving that conflict will bring an end to what i believe is a graver challenge and threat to the united states which is the threat of terrorism and the threat of a nuclear-armed iran. thanks. >> ron meyer. a lot of people in the media have said that your father needs to be quiet on the issue of national security. >> they're wrong. [laughter] >> here, here, exactly. now, what i'm wondering what do you think about president bush's role in all of this. he obviously had firsthand information. he knew about what we were doing on national security and guantanamo and the techniques we were using. now shouldn't he as president of the united states be standing up and fighting for the values we believe in? >> you know, it's an interesting role that former presidents have. and i think you did hear president bush when he spoke last week, i believe,

they were not necessarily terrorists. we need to take special precautions. but in the pursuance of the policies enunciated by the president of the united states, when he ran for office, when he was substantially elected by the american people, he told them exactly what he thought ought to be done. he is pursuing what he said to the american people he would do. he is doing in my opinion in a thoughtful way that will protect the american public and will bring to justice those who have committed international crimes. and i think that is something that we are trying to work through. i want to reiterate the gentleman has now mentioned so many times that we have allowed the funding of the troops to get caught up with other issues. surely the gentleman i know does not mean because he's been here long enough to know when the house and senate and the presidency were in the hands of his party, funding of the troops got tied up from time to time with other issues. that's the nature of the legislative process. but i'm hopeful that the gentleman because he's so focused o

would experience a terrorist wmd attack. they had over -- they met with over two hundred 50 individuals and held hearings. they spent six months with nine commissioners, involved in an intensive research and fact- finding operation. they had staff and they came to the sort of conclusions, that they felt this would likely happen. you would have to ask them particular. host: when they came to president bush and then before congress, what is the role of congress? what do they want to see congress do? guest: this is an offshoot of the 9/11 commission. they set this up and they recommend go to -- people go to preventwmd.com. they feel there should be a high level individual either in the vice president's office that would look at this issue in particular, that would look at the issue of wmd terrorism. there is a whole list of different recommendations. host: is part of your concern or their concern is that here we are, almost eight years from september 11th and the concern is winning? guest: i certainly am complacent. 2013 is fou

brotherhood leaders, care conspired with other affiliates of the muslim brotherhood to support terrorists. further, according to senate testimony, care received a -- care denied this was the case. specifically awad's claims to the contrary were an outright lie. our organization did not receive any seed money from the holy land foundion. when confronted with the i.r.s. forum on which the holy land foundation disclosed the contribution, he changed his position in supplemental testimony submitted to the subcommittee saying that, quote, the amount in question was a donation like any other. care ultimately filed an amicus brief seeking removal from the list of unindicted co-conspirators in the holy land foundation case. in september of 2007, prosecutors made several arguments in favor of maintaining care's status saying, quote, care has been identified by the government at trial as a participants in an ongoing and ultimately unlawful conspiracy to support a designated terrorist organization, a conspiracy from which care never withdrew. the holy land foundation trial revealed more about care th

they will ask how can he justify putting that information in the hands of terrorists? president obama says and he said in his speech at the national archives he didn't harm national security by releasing the information because he assured he would never use these techniques. really, never? he needs to be asked directly, mr. president, and a ticking time bombs and area with american lives at stake are you on a willing to subject a terrorist to tough treatment if it would get information that would prevent an attack on the homeland? is it really your position, mr. president, you would sacrifice american lives rather than used illegal methods we know worked that can get information to save those lives? i think the american people deserve to know the answer to that question. instead the president has taken to a accusing us of abandoning of values or as he said in egypt last week the fear and anger caused by 1911, quote, lead us to act contrary to american ideals. the line that got him up walls in cairo but a trail in my opinion when he said it there and the trail when he s

they, in fact, are terrorists. is they are still allowed humane treatment but they don't is the same rights as prisoners of war. that means as the president acknowledged, as the united states supreme court has averaged, we have a right to hold them until the cessation of hostilities so they don't kill anymore people. you can't just turn them loose. now, the president, in his speech, made the point that at least 60, i think, is the number used, of these prisoners had been released and they were released by the bush administration. that's true. the bush administration was under a lot of pressure to try to release as many of these people who were being held as possible. and so they held determinations. they have a determination once a year and initially as to what the status of the individual is and whether he is still a danger and eventually in many of the cases they decided that the person could be released back to their home country or to a country that would take them and it wouldn't pose a danger to the united st

so even the most enemy focused completely kinetic terrorist approach or anti-terrorist approach in afghanistan would require close basis with u.s. forces on them and let's imagine that strike asset i talked about, the special forces unit is 50 guys which is what you need to take down ten terrorists. if it's 50 guice you need 150 guys because they have to sleep and you need a base for them to live on and someone to protect the base and a road to get your food in and headquarters. you need a relationship with the population otherwise why are they giving you assistance so it turns out to boy lit all down if you're going to do counterterrorism even the basic form of counterterrorism you need to also do a certain minimum level of counterinsurgency to protect the population and get them on sight before you can be effective and that certain minimum level turns out to be substantial. so unfortunately the need clinical destructive bad guys approach isn't going to work. now with the current administration has done i think is focused on the immediate crisis and i think it exactly why is. what they've don

he suggested a number of those terrorists will be brought to the united states. his director of national intelligence went so far as to say a number of them would have to be replaced -- released in the united states and we would have to use taxpayer dollars to put together a welfare program, a terrorist reentry program. then president obama released documents over the objection of his own cia director and four former cia directors that detailed the specific techniques that we use in our enhanced interrogation program to get information from terrorists. next he suggested that he was open to the prosecution of bush administration officials who had been bought in the program. finally, he refused to release any information about the attacks that were prevent or the lives that were saved because of the program. he praised the effectiveness of the program and the fact that the terrorist attacks had been prevented, but his white house edited out that reference in the memo before the release it to the public. today, many weeks later, the president still will not let you,

so, no, i wasn't a terrorist. when we went underground, we cross lines of propriety, we crossed lines of common sense, you could say they were despicable acts if you'd like to, but i think if you say they were despicable acts, you ought to also add it was pretty despicable to be killing 6,000 people a week. so i don't in the book, again, i don't defend what we did, i try as most literary memoirs do, try to understand how this guy got there, how this son of privileged got into that spot and did the things that he did. but i don't defend it, and i don't -- but i do try to understand it. so, no, i was not a terrorist, we were not terrorists, we were never charged with terrorism, we were never charged with hurting people which is kind of, again, the fox news narrative or with trying to hurt people because we didn't. >> host: before we leave the topic of education, of all your education books that you've written or edited which would you recommend to people to read if they wanted to read one? >> guest: well, the one th

this important terrorist program allows i.c.e. to proactively investigate and review visa applications to identify potential terrorists or criminal suspects before they gain entry into the united states. that's the key. unfortunately, the administration did not seek increased funding for this valuable program in its budget request. while i'm pleased that the bill we are considering today ensures a portion of the funding for this program -- will be reserved to open several new visa security units in high risk locations, i think we should provide additional resources to accelerate i.c.e.'s plan for expanding to other critical locations, which is what my amendment does. i.c.e. currently operates 14 visa security units overseas. my amendment increases funding for the visa security program by $1.7 million, which will allow i.c.e. to stand up an additional security unit. i.c.e. has identified additional locations for new units but has not yet opened its units in these areas largely due to the resource constraints. to offset this increas

so, no, i was not a terrorist. we were not terrorists. we were never charged with terrorism. we were never charged with hurting people, which is kind of again the fox news narrative. or were trying to hurt people because we didn't. >> host: before we leave the topic of education, of all your education books you have written or edited, which would you recommend to people to read if they wanted to read one? >> guest: the one that is most widely read is called, to teach, the journey of a teacher, and it's the one that is read by a more general audience. so much so that the third edition is going to be a graphic novel and i brought chapter one with me. i worked with a 26-year-old cartoonist, n

that is where we find out what the terrorists' plans are, who are the terrorists are and where they're likely to strike. and if we cannot say that we're not going to have frivolous lawsuits against those who respond to lawful orders from the federal government, then we're not going to be able to have access to that information. i'm happy to report that earlier this month the united states district court of the northern district of california, which had raised questions and entertained legislation, rejected the constitutional challenges that a carrier liability provisions and dismissed all but a few of the lawsuits involved in the multidistrict litigation. they found that contrary to mr. koh, that they were constitutional and in a well-reasoned opinion said that they were right. and a bipartisan majority in both houses of congress said they were right. let me be clear, the fisa amendments act was a necessary and important piece of national security legislation that is keeping us all safe. but despite what apparently mr. koh does not see it that way. despite the overwhelming bipartisan a

one is for this secure fight, it is the government information related to who might be terrorists andpside, everybody would like to get to the line faster in sight i know i am not a terrorist and do a background check, let me through. the problem is that we have that as a private-sector operation and there really was up to what they want to make it which was for their business model in front of the line thing. i think that already today there are a lot of variations tsa screening for people that have the black diamond lanes and expert traveler, family and it would lanes, and when i traveled and now i just travel as a private citizen, the lines are not to me a big problem so i think there is a business model for the registered traveler. i hope they do as some of the companies in europe do with a tie in things like expedited parking reserve, right up front, and the movie all the way through. there is an opportunity to do new things there. and i think that is a great entrepreneurially opportunity, but it is not to be confused with the security program that secure supply is. and one of th

they are called terrorists. we call them terrorists because they want to kill us. it is good to not have them anywhere near us because it makes it harder for them to kill us. now, the average american could hear that simple, declare tiff sentence and say to themselves, "okay, there's the terrorists are ok gang and there's the terrorists in guantanemo gang." okay, i got it. i'm with the terrorists stay in guantanemo gang. well, the president who had aim possible position -- it was once said of lincoln and douglas that lincoln was the best lawyer in illinois with a good case and douglas was the best lawyer in illinois with a bad case. i'm beginning to think president obama is in the douglas tradition. the president whose a remarkably wonderful other tore said we are here in a deeply meaningful moment in which we are going to in a meaningful way engage in discussing a problem so complex and difficult that only myself can present it to you in a way that you will fully appreciate the meaningfulness of this moment that we have here together. an average american said "got

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 most fanatical islamic movements as a way to weaken and destroy the arab nationalist and marxist movements in those parts of the world. so taliban, hamas, al-qaeda. they didn't just pop out

steps towards dismantlement of the terrorist infrastructure in pakistan. our prime minister and president zadari met on the sidelines of zadari met on the sidelines of the sco meeting in russia and6 they have directed the foreign secretaries to meet and discuss the issue of terrorism and what steps pakistan is taking to deal with the terrorists who were involved in attacks in india in the past. i think it's important that there is some ernest of sincerity because in the absence of that it would be extremely difficult to have a constructive dialog, you know, terrorism and dialog cannot go hand-in-hand. so we would like to see an ernest of sincerity from pakistan on this issue. >> i promised the ambassador that i would release her at 9 0 9:30. i hope this is the beginning of a conversation that we can continue in the months and years to come. and let me thank the audience and ask you to remain @ earlier today come bernie madoff was sentenced to the maximum 150 years in prison for his multibillion-dollar fraud scheme. the district judge handed down the senten

people who suggest we can on detain terrorists in our prisons should show more respect for the brave corrections officers who put their lives on the line every day to keep us safe. just the week before last i went to the prison in southern illinois. it was once our maximum security prison in the united states before the super maximum facility was opened at florence colorado. it was interesting as i met with the corrections officer in the lockup of the mary and federal prison, and after a little bit of a tour i asked what do you think of this notion that we hear from senators on the floor like senator kyl and senator mcconnell that we cannot safely incarcerate guantanamo detainees in the presence of the united states? the one corrections officer said senator, in salted by the comment. at this facility we are now incarcerating members of colombian drug terrorist gangs and have had serial murderers and we have incarcerated john gotti, we've incarcerated some of the most dangerous people convicted, brought into the country from overseas where the opposing a threat to america and the unit

i was not a terrorist. we were not a terrorist we were never charged with terrorism or hurting people which is the fox news narrative or trying to hurt people because we did not. >> host: before we leave the topic of education of all of your books you have written or edited which would you recommend to people to read if they wanted to read one? >> guest: the most widely read is the one called to teach, the journey of a teacher at it is a red more by a wide audience as in fact, the third edition will be a graphic novel and abroad the new chapter one with me i have worked with akon -- cartoonist from a brilliant young man who moved in with us several months and be storyboard a book and i first thought would be decided to do this we would do an illustrated version of to teach. that would be easy but i had to learn from this young man a graphic novel is not an illustrated book is entirely different. the reason is because it is in the intersection of art and words that the thing that comes to live so we wrote in

steps towards dismantlement of the terrorist infrastructure in pakistan. our prime minister and president zadari met on the sidelines of zadari met on the sidelines of the sco meeting in russia and6 they have directed theor

berkley pointed out, is a terrorist organization in control -- i'm sorry, hamas is a terrorist organization in control of gaza. and what hamas needs to do is recognize israel's right to exist, abide by all previous agreements that the palestinians have signed and renounce terrorism personally. and permanently. renounce terrorism permanently. otherwise why should israel negotiate with a government that deny thes its very right to exist? the united states -- denies its very right to exist? the united states is right to call it a terrorist nation. we do not believe we should provide aid to gaza until hamas meets these conditions. so, you know, there are people who also say that the palestinian-israeli problem needs to be settled before there can be peace in the region. that is nonsense. the problem with iran has to be settled before there can be peace in the region. we all know that iran is developing nuclear weapons. we all know that ahmadinejad has threatened to wipe israel off the face of the earth. we all hope he loses in his election this week, but whoever replaces him is not going to be

is in one man's terrorist another man's freedom fighter? when you allow israel to be able to do whatever they choose to do and to allow the palestinians not to have their own sovereignty, if it was reversed the other way, we would be, it is terrible. i feel that the united states should come clean and say that the arabs have basically been a tribal people. they have had battles with the jews since the beginning of time. they will continue to have battles. why don't we be honest and say that the only reason we're there is because of fuel? the united states, if it does not need any fuel any more, we will see the truth of it. it is a shame. we should mind our business. when we say we really care about human rights, why do we trade with china? why do we go to saudi arabia? it is a shame what we do to the muslims. host: let me jump in on two points. did the president not address that issue of nuclear weapons and also trying to solve -- to develop long-term peace? caller: absolutely not. president obama went there and was speaking to these people

but if an attack from iran or a terrorist organization becomes imminent, this congress should declare that israel, like the united states should reserve for itself, the inalienable right to defend itself and protect its people. i encourage my colleagues to demonstrate their strong support for israel by supporting this amendment. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? mr. berman: yes, mr. chairman. i ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition to this amendment although i am not opposed to it. the chair: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. berman: mr. chairman, i yield myself such time as i may consume. i don't know that we needed to say this but i'm glad we are saying it. it goes almost without saying that any sovereign country has an inalienable right to defend itself in the face of an imminent nuclear or military attack or threat. and nothing in this amendment prohibits or constrains the -- israel or the united states from discussing the nature of the threat, the logic o

terrorists recruit such people. they are separate programs. you must make sure you do not cross that two. host: here is buffalo, new york on our democrats line. caller: hello. my question is, you said that in seven days of the intermission is deleted from your system, correct? guest: yes. caller: what about frequent fliers? does this policy get at par due in activity on line? people have to be cautious about putting their information out on the web like that. guest: that is a good question. it is the reason it has taken so long to get this program up and running, to guarantee the privacy protection. in the first couple of years there were legitimate concerns about this in particular. the whole system has been re- written to ensure the privacy. the two best things are that it only takes a limited amount of data, your name, gender, date of birth. it gets rid of it seven days afterward. host: "the new york times" article says it will begin to kick in later this summer. could you pin that down for a more exact date? guest: no, it is a moving targe

imagine terrorists stage an attack on u.s. soil in the next four years and the recriminations afterward, administration officials are sued by families of victims for having advised in legal memos that guantanamo be closed and that interrogations of al qaeda detainees be limited. should these officials be personally liable for the advice they gave to president obama? the article goes on to say, we would say, no, but that's exactly the kind of lawsuit that the political left, including state department nominee harold koh, has encouraged against bush administration officials. and, of course, it goes on to talk about the lawsuit brought by jose padilla, convicted terrorist, against lawyers at the office of legal counsel, the justice department, that is being encouraged, if not facilitated, by harold koh, the outgoing dean of the yale law school, the person who is being proposed for promotion as a legal advisor at the justice department. i just think it's -- his views are, if they were confined to academia and yale law school, it w

they are terrorists.y are being treated in a manner that you would expect americans to treat prisoners from other conflicts, and that is certainly what has been done. i think it is going to be very difficult to close guantÁnamo. now, the current administration is finding that out. we found that out. there were debates about guantanamo in our illustration. the president said at one point that he would like to close guantÁnamo. no one could never figure out what you're going to do, because you could not figure out what to do with bad actors at guantanamo -- no one can never figure out how to close it. the other day, the inmates at guantanamo were referred to as "abductees." this sounded like people who were kidnapped on the way to the movies. these are bad actors. these are the worst of the course. during the bush administration, we had reviewed all of the cases of the people down there, and they are all entitled to an annual review of their case, and several hundred of them, i believe, 500 of them, they we

so if we have terrorists, they are somewhere in fort beatridie. new evidence for 9/11 has been uncovered by "the new york times" given to families of 9/11, uncovering that saudi arabia was a major financial backer of those involved in 9/11. host: is saudi arabia and internal threat? guest: first of all, i do not think that is any secret that there are sources within saudi arabia, whether they are in the form of contributions or -- john mccain said that we pay that part of the world for oil, but much of the end up in the pockets of terrorists. that is not a revelation. it is common knowledge. it is a fact. for the longest time, there were those in the saudi government, and there was this notion that you could export the terrorists as an extreme factor in order to get them out of their own indigenous country, they have kind of support of them overseas. once they were attacked in riyadh, they realize you cannot export potential troublemakers because a comeback -- it comes back and land in your own backyard. they have been much supportive -- they have

, horrific terrorists came from the inner parts of afghanistan and we abandoned afghanistan. we did not pay attention to them. and so it is important now to ensure that we do it in the right way. that we don't maintain an extended force in afghanistan, but we help in a col brative way to fight the terrorists and re-establish institutions that will help them build their society, both with respect to education and social services. so part of this legislation does include that funding. the eyes are then on pakistan. there is a regional effort. secretary state clinton and the president have appointed ambassador holbrook to be an envoy and he has been in those camps where he has seen 2.5 million people displaced. we must provide them the opportunity to return to a rebuilt region. these are individuals who have fought for their freedom, who left the area because they did not want to be overtaken by insurgents, the taliban, who want to undermine the system of democracy and yes, terrorists. one man flad with 13 of his children living in a tent. he said his home is occupied by pakista

we have already begun importing terrorists. these guantanamo detainees are trained to foment dissent among americans and we should do everything possible to keep them away from our local military bases and our prisons. again i urge my colleagues to vote no on this rule and the conference report so we can quickly make these necessary changes to protect our troops in the field and bring back a clean troop funding bill. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from new york. mr. arcuri: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield three minutes to the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan is recognized for three minutes. mr. levin: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. levin: i want to talk about a clearly necessary provision in this bill. the fleet modernization provision. but i do want to say just two mings briefly. comment on what has been

terrorists, people who are considered terrorists are generally held out of the general population. so there's not the ability to interact with other prisoners in a way some might have an ability then to try to radicalize them. then beyond that, what we have tried to put in place are programs to deal with -- to occupy the time of the people who are in these facilities so that they have alternatives, they have the ability to think of a light outside the prison. and if they have options, if they think they have a life they can lead on the right side of the law they are far less susceptible to these efforts. >> guantanamo was constructed in such a way as to accommodate this particular requirement. it may be more difficult to do that with a supermax facility without asking you to respond to that today, would you include some information in your response to us? i think all of us it would be helpful in preparation for our hearing. >> we will detail for how we think the facilities we have can be used to minimize the concerns that you have expressed. >> the final question in this area is, s

the reality post-september 11, 2001, is that terrorist organizations may also seek to exploit openings along our borders to smuggle operatives or potential weapons. in the week since their anniversary, just since may 28, the border patrol has apprehended six alien gang members, seized three guns, six trailers carrying contraband, including one with 40 illegal aliens, seized thousands of pounds of marijuana and an ultralight aircraft. about 6:00 a.m. last sunday, there was an individual on a surf board paddling north to international border. the surfer was holding a blue duffel bag. he released it as agents approached. soon after the duffel bag was inspected by border patrol agents. it had five packages of marijuana, estimated street value at $75,000. they're creative and we have to be in response. i urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this resolution and to honor the border patrol, express support for their important mission and pledge support to enhance their capability to gain operational control over our border. thank you, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore

as a terrorist weapon? it is my understanding that the answer to that question is no. a terrorist could not in any plant get his hands on anything. even if a terrorist got his hands on weapons grade plutonium, which is the ultimate product of the reprocessing, and he would need the resources of the nation state to turn that weapons-grade plutonium into a bomb. is that correct? >> yes, sir. the plutonium that results from the reprocessing in france is not classified as weapons grade. >> ok. that is the recent we do not reprocessed. jimmy carter set -- the reason we do not reprocess. jimmy carter said that this would be dangerous. . the technology that we developed. >> and would definitely agree that was the public face of it, much in the same way that three mile island was the public face of the demise of the new build it in this country. if you look at the other factors that went into it, you had several attempts to build several attempts to build commer reprocessing facilities at the time. frankly, the nrc