tv Washington Journal CSPAN May 3, 2011 7:00am-10:00am EDT
eastern on cspan 3. >> coming up, we'll continue our discussion on the death of osama bin laden. representatives eliot engel and a representative from virginia will join us. the effect osama bin laden's death will have on security. >> good morning and welcome to "washington journal" on this tuesday, may 3, 2011. we will discuss the meaning of the death of osama bin laden. he was hiding in an apparently comfortable compound. we will look at pakistan and the allies. here are the numbers to call in.
added to the mix, on different national news, there are reporting since 9/11 happened, there have been articles that bin laden was already killed. this whole charade about him finally being debt now is undercut by of the articles from fighters -- dead now is undercut by the other articles. he has been killed like nine times. first we need to answer the question as to why do we have nine ap stories of him already dead.ing host: what evidence do you need
that he was actually killed this time? caller: osama bin laden is like santa claus. he shows up everywhere. many photoshop experts say it is not the same person in all of these films. it reminds me of santa claus. there are many different santa clauses that show up everywhere. host: what do you think this shows us about pakistan? caller: it has not changed my view of pakistan. they are right there with iran as to whether they are our friend or enemy. if we are concerned about iran having nuclear weapons, we should be more concerned about pakistan.
we need to get rid of their nuclear weapons, before we start a war with pakistan that is going to be more serious than what we have seen so far. host: philadelphia, pa., jake on our democrats line. caller: you cannot make pakistan an enemy. they are still letting us in their country to launch an assault against potential terrorist targets. it is a debacle on their part to allow osama bin laden to stay in their backyard. we need to move forward. what secretaryr of state hillary clinton had to say yes today. >> we are committed to support
the people in government as they try to fight their democracy against violent extremists. bin laden has also declared war on pakistan. he ordered the killings of many innocent pakistani men, women and children. in recent years, the cooperation between our governments, military, and law-enforcement agencies increased pressure on al qaeda and the taliban. this progress must continue. we are committed to our partnership. host: we are talking about the killing of osama bin laden over the weekend. we look forward to hear your comments and your thoughts on our relationship with pakistan. he was found in a town of living
in comfort not far from islamabad. caller: this latest disclosure that they killed obama -- osama bin laden, there have been at 3 or four * that they made this announcement over his death, only to be proven it was a fraud or the photo was fake. this time it is the same thing. it looks like a lot of theater. the thing that scares me is what they are planning next. this is a big moment. they need to use this to rule out some other big change. this is a complete phony thing. host: take a look at what's the
100% on our side. you need to keep your friends' clothes and your enemies closer. we need to keep a close eye on pakistan. host: take a look at the "new york times" piece. they have an extensive story that details what was happening behind the scenes at the white house and on the ground and in pakistan. it led to the location of the al qaeda team.
also looking at what happened over the weekend on sunday. president obama and members of his national security team received an update on sunday. a classified document before hillary clinton was blurred before the photo was released. you can see the looks on everyone's face. let us go to hear about what the reaction is in the muslim world. we have our washington bureau chief joining us on the phone. what is the feeling right now across the arab world as how this is being received? guest: most people welcome this demise.
he is the man considered the cause for the innovation into afghanistan and maybe the war in iraq. the headlines of one major newspaper said, the killer has been killed. commentary columnists and people on television is essentially say that he has been overtaken by the defense in the arab world. they noted the revolutions in egypt and in other places with some political discourse. he was ignored totally. his discourse was rejected intellectually by many people before. too many people, he belongs to a bygone era.
some people were raising his concerns about the way he was buried at sea. this is a minority. throughout the arab world, the interest and concerns of people really sway beyond what has been represented. tell us what people are saying regarding the burial at sea and if it was done in an islamic tradition. guest: some people believe in conspiracy theories. there is no reason to believe that the body was not washed and rap and. in the tradition. -- wrapped in the tradtion. -- tradition. some say it is acceptable,
others say it is not. most if not all of the world considers this man evil. put an end to a very bloody and dismal chapter. i doubt there will be a retraction for anyone saying the americans were engaged in something that was against islamic people. if you look at the commentary in the newspapers and what people are saying on television, they are beyond -- behind the idea that osama bin laden is gone. host: has there been talked
about him being killed months now?eople noversus guest: we can only speculate about that. a year before that, if you look at the statement and the date released by the second in command, you see a tone of defensiveness that is clear in its concern about the events. first he would say that we were forced to be -- resort to violence. many innocent moslems were killed. -- muslims were killed.
and al qaeda is not having the support that it had in many other countries. many victims of osama bin laden -- he killed roughly 15,000 innocent people throughout the world, more than 8500 of them were the muslims. the argument that this man discriminated when it comes to ethnic background is not true. he was a killer using the name of islam to justify his actions. when you go to jordan and similar places, the during your wedding, what kind of message does it send to the population or the public opinion? these are the arguments that
people have brought up over the last few days. host: how have the images of americans rejoicing been perceived? some people gathered outside of the white house early monday morning. how are they being received? guest: i did not see any single reference that implied the americans are gloating or this is unseemly or unacceptable. last week, after the reports that the son of gaddafi was killed and nato may have been targeting gaddafi himself, some
people were celebrating in the streets. you do not want to celebrate the death of anybody, but it is understandable but people have been terrorized by this man into what he represented and they are relieved because of his demise. i do not see any serious commentator from the arab world saying that what happened at ground zero is unseemly. host: thank you for joining us this morning. we are talking about osama bin laden being killed over the weekend and what it means going forward. what do you think it means for the relationship the u.s. has in the middle east with pakistan and other countries. our next caller is republican.
caller: i think one person said -- i was thinking about it before he said it, we should keep our friends clothes and our enemies closer. we get our intelligence from pakistan. we should keep them close, even though we understand they may be hiding some things. we need to watch out for the potential collateral damage that we can take in from these operations. they need to be part of the intelligence that we receive for our homeland security. if we understand that they may not be one under% on our side, we can still have a relation -- 100% on our side, we can still have a relationship with them.
host: tampa, fla., independent color. -- caller. caller: i think the killing marks a monumental shift in foreign policy towards the middle east. i think it is unclear at this point. during the vietnam war, we did not accomplish a mission. people came home. not a lot of support. all of the sudden now, the mission has been accomplished. we went there to track down osama bin laden.
we may not have gotten into afghanistan or iraq under other conditions. initially, the s&p futures were low 12 points. now we have an excuse to pull out of the middle east and reduce the deficit. s information trickled in, there was a change in sentiment, which is we went into afghanistan to track down osama bin laden and iraq to find in control weapons of mass destruction. it was did they have weapons of
mass destruction or harboring osama bin laden. host: let's listen to what a senator said yesterday. >> army intelligence of pakistan have a lot of questions to answer given the location, when the time, and the fact that this facility was built for bin laden and is close to the central location of the pakistani army. so they have plenty of questions they should be answering, and hopefully they are being asked by the pakistani government. the pakistani president's statement was very reassuring today, when he specifically said that he thinks it is a great victory and a success that he
congratulates us on. by his statement, the civilian leadership may not have known. i hope people follow-through and ask some very tough questions of his own military and intelligence. they have a lot of explaining to do. host: sen. levin speaking yesterday. let's go to our next caller. caller: i have been to pakistan. the average person in pakistan -- it is a different society. they really treated as well while we were there regionus well while we were the --
treated us well while we were there. you are dealing with an individual that was able to send power into our country, train them, and conduct an operation. he was able to do that. so he could sneak into pakistan and do what he did there. host: let's go to twitter. looking at the "washington post" image of the compound. this is a 1 acre complex built in 2005 with a three story size ofe, 8time times the
caller: bush made a promise that if any foreign country that been lavin would be herbert,bin laden would be harbored, we would deal with that country. secondly, i think this is a plot to get the president win the election. i am a republican. i voted for him. it was a mistake. i voted because he promised he would bring our men and women home from afghanistan. it was an absolute lie. that is the only reason i voted to him. he has been lying to the public ever since. host: do you think this changes
terrorist in the world living in your backyard and not knowing it for decades, and our government saying we got him and now the body disappers. we bury him at sea. wgerhere is the proof? i could tell you he is still alive, but do i have approved? n -- due bo i have proof? no. so i could tell you anything. host: here is a comment on twitter.
michael on a republican line. caller: i would not be so quick to judge them that they are not a necessary ally. they do provide us with a lot of proper intelligence. they do have questions to answer to mr. obama and us the americans. this is very bizarre that osama bin laden could be living in such a luxurious mansion just outside of the pakistani capital, a beautiful neighborhood and you could not know it. they have a lot of questions to answer to president obama. until then, we should remain neutral with pakistan. host: let us look at this piece in "usa today." it is talking dna questions.
relationship with pakistan? caller: i believe that the ramifications behind as showing the picture of osama bin laden to the world, the country is asking our president for his identification. muslimere a mu and himslcallinm and stuff. if we showed to the whole world what we did to this man, if you want to get the terrorists of this world together, all you have to do is show this picture. host: michigan, republican line. caller: we are spending a lot of money and so forth. it would be simple to fire
nuclear warheads and wipe out the castles of pakistan, iran, and iraq until all 22 arab nations surrender to the u.s. and we could launch missiles two times a week until they all surrender and burn all of their mosques and wipe out the whole arab system and if they did not do that, they all would be dead in a couple of months. host: a very different perspective from what we have heard. and here is one column.
are against each other. host: what do you think -- what was your reaction when you heard the news about osama bin laden being killed? caller: i was happy. i am a christian, but i was really happy. i was happy that our president did what he said he was going to do. i wish they would truly give him some praise for that. they do not want to give him his proper praise. host: here is a story about a man in pakistan live tweeting about the raid that took place sunday morning.
pseudomonas in on national sadam hussein pseudomona on national television. they are not doing the same with osama bin laden. there is something fishy going on. host: terry from georgia. caller: i do not believe pakistan is our ally. we had given them $18 billion since 9/11 in 2001. how could they not know that osama bin laden was there? he was 400 yards from the biggest military institution there. i was offended by hillary yesterday saying how much the pakistanis supported us. no they are not.
we know they are not our allies. -- ally. when they buried him in accordance to muslim law, that was a slap in the face to every 9/11 victim out there. why didn't they give him the give him-- idid they the respect to give him a muslim burial. it was rude and hurtful. i wish someone would answer me that. it was so troubling. host: roy, independent line.
we are better than that. we do not attract people through the streets. -- drag people through the streets. bush gave them the task of taking bin laden out. they said it was too hot or too cold or something. now we have a $10 trillion cost because of george bush. it will take us 100 years to clean up his filthy mess. it started with the 2000 election. they stole it in at least one dozen ways. host: let's take a look at the relationship between the administration. one source says president obama
the government understands that we cannot fully trust pakistan. they are a scary nation. they have nuclear weapons. it is almost like it is split between the followers of bin laden and the government and neither knows what they are doing. no one is in total control of its. host: here is what one person rights. -- writes. doug, independent caller in west
virginia. caller: i want to comment on how everybody seems to view the attacks of 9/11 as the hand of one is the hand of all. in terms of muslims. they do not have the same reasoning when it comes to and bombing ands in the bombin christians. osama bin laden was a horrible terrorist. it was just a matter of time. you cannot hide from that kind of evil and definitely. -- indefinitely.
host: thanks for your calls and comments. we will speak with a representative, eliot engel, next. we will be right back. ♪ ♪ ♪ >> you can now access our programming anytime with the span radio-- cease i radiop iphone app. download it free. >> pour over two decades, bin laden has been at the leader and symbol of al qaeda. he has continued to plot attacks
against our friends and allies. the debt of bin laden is the most significant achievementd -- death of bin laden is the most significant achievement against terrorism to date. >> search, watch, click, a share, washington your way on the c-span video library. >> every weekend, experience american history on c-span3. here first-person accounts from people who have shaped modern america on oral history. features key figures and events the civil war. and go to college classrooms as professors talk during lectures
about history. and the presidency, focusing on american president and policies, go through speeches, and listen to american officials. that is on c-span 3 american history tv. >> "washington journal" continues. host: what is the mood in your district? guest: everyone like all americans are very relieved that osama bin laden has been killed. new yorkers have a special feeling because of the twin
towers there. so many people were killed there from my district. new york, since 9/11, has bonded together more than ever before. that bonding comes together even more when an incident like this happens. he had elude capture for 10 years. he made gasol very frustrated. richardeluded -- eluded capture for 10 years and made us very frustrated. host: you were born in a race in
the bronx. and raised in the bronx. guest: my district goes into three counties. many policemen and firemen lost their lives during 9/11. it is very sad. people's lives will never be the same. i heard that this gives people closure. it never gives them closure. it does help that he is not walking around thumbing his nose at the united states while thousands of people are dead. i think justice was served. host: what it does this say
about the u.s. relationship with pakistan? guest: it is very troubling. i have felt our relationship with pakistan has multiple shades, twists and turns. it seems impossible that no one knew where he was. we assumed he would be in a cave or mountains along the afghanistan and pakistan border. for him to be in an opulent compound and nobody knew, it reminds me after the second world war when the german population said they did not know of about the death camps. somebody in the government had to know. there was no telephone service. they burned their garbage right on the premises. there are too many things that do not fit the norm for nobody
to be suspicious or have any idea. i think there are people on the highest level of the pakistani government had to know something. the fact that it took us 10 years -- i am glad we did it. better late than never. i think president obama and leon panetta for their great work in doing this. but somebody in the pakistani government had to know. it is probably quite a few. host: you can join this conversation. call the numbers at the bottom of your screen. our guest serves on the foreign affairs committee. this is from "usa today" talking about closure. there is a commentary by a young
woman who lost her mother of board the flight on september 11, 2001. she goes into the detail of her own experience in her lawsuit that she still feels 10 years later. she says that this does not bring her closure. as we pause and think about this, it brings up a lot of images of 9/11. here is one of the tower is burning. what is your perception 10 years later on that day and the contrast to the killing of osama bin laden? guest: people that have loved ones killed, there can never be closure. we understand at some point in our lives, parents get older and
passed away. it leaves a hole in our heart and it is a natural progressive thing. but to have people die on flight 93 and the pentagon and the twin towers and through this type of attack, i do not think people's lives are the same after that. i do not think their lives are ever the same. new york has pulled together from that point on. the city is doing well. it is a great place to live. i was born there and have lived there all my life. our innocence was lost that day. we have a feeling that the atlantic and pacific have protected us. we had this feeling that we were untouchable. if you went to europe at that
time or israel, you saw policeman walking around with automatic guns. we never had that in the united states. i see how it has changed right here in washington when i was elected to congress 20 years ago. you could drive your car right up to the capitol steps as a terrorist. now, there are all kinds of checks, stops, road blocks. the capitol police checks you out. we never had that before. it has changed our lives as americans. the frustration of getting on an airplane and going through that x-ray machine and not being able to take liquids and things like that. it has changed us. we are doing things that other countries did before 9/11 to protect us.
it has changed us as americans and makes us more vigil. host: mike is in flint, mich., a republican caller. caller: i think we both president obama a lot of praise and president bush for starting this. we owe our military past and present -- it is unbelievable. they were able to accomplish this. it is a wonderful thing. guest: i agree. credit is due all around. we have partisan battles in washington. democrats against republicans. they do not care about democrats or republicans or the color of ever skin. they want to kill us because we are american.
we must remember that. we remember the frustration way back when with the aryan revolution in 1979. -- iranian revolution in 1979. we have come a long way since then. it makes me even more proud to be an american. it sends a message to terrorists that if you want to mess with us, we will track you down and kill you. host: democrats line. hominy not seize have lived in america? have lived inzi's america? 40 or 50. i am not surprised that bin
laden was in pakistan. guest: there are a lot of in justices in the world. we can talk about the war in iraq and whether it was right or wrong. the same thing about afghanistan. the bottom line is that osama bin laden was a mass murder of innocent people. i believe the world is much better off without him. host: this just in from abc news. president obama and white house officials are discussing the possibility of releasing a photograph of the corpse of osama bin laden. it is bloody in gruesome.
should that photo be released publicly? guest: i believe it should. people have a right to see it. it brings no doubt to the fact that he is dead and was killed. there are many decisions made. part of it is because you have these conspiracy theories and other people saying things. it is important that the photo be shown. caller: i have been watching news broadcasting. i am relieved that bin laden is not around anymore. no one is talking about his money. he had some 5 $20 million that he has been funding all the terrorism with -- he has had $520 million. has anyone talked about it?
guest: i think it is something that we know it is there. we killed him and we're talking about the implication. we'll know there are terrorist networks that have money hidden in all kinds of places. we're always trying to go after the money. some of the countries that are now killing their own people like syria or iran, we have sanctions to try to attract the money. so leaders cannot make themselves rich. it is the same thing about the terrorist network. sometimes we are successful and sometimes we are not. but believe me, we are doing our job where money is concerned. host: our guest is congressman eliot engel, a democrat from new york. parts of new york state and the
region around new york city delaware lost some of its citizens store in the world trade attack on 9/11. thes look from congressional research service. u.s. foreign aid in fy11. host: what do you think about the money we are sending to pakistan? guest: i think we have to reassess our entire relationship with pakistan. there are shades of gray. pakistan is a nuclear power, not someone we want to just dismiss. we need their help in fighting the war on terror. it has been clear to me that they have been playing duplicitous games.
you have the terrorist organizations are running rampant in pakistan. major terrorists that we capture, two or 3 or four are all in pakistan. many of the homegrown terrorists are in pakistan. i think at some point we have to ask ourselves, sending all those billions and billions of dollars to pakistan, we don't want to be played for fools. the war on terror is an important war. we have drone's going in and killing people. we went on to pakistani territory. they could have tried to stop us. it is clear that plane duplicitous games -- that playing duplicitous gains and being blind to terrorism when they know it exists on their soil, and i don't think they're doing enough to help us in combating terrorism.
we cannot dismiss them. they are a nuclear power. what happens in pakistan -- i do think we have to get tougher. i don't think that we do not want to be played for fools. host: this is from twitter. he does not think we should be there. look at that number, nearly $4 billion, as it recipient in foreign aid. going to afghanistan. guest: i think it is clear we cannot plot merrily along and keep this war going year in and year out. we need an assessment. i do not want to pull our troops out tomorrow. we are fighting al qaeda. is this the best way to counter al qaeda, having our young men and women in harm's way, costing billions and billions of dollars?
you have the afghan government work hamid karzai talking in a negative way about the united states. it galls me when the united states spends so much money and people diss us, it just galls me. pakistan is important. if we left a mark, the taliban would probably take over. -- if we left tomorrow, the taliban would probably take over. i think it's a debate that we will seek in the congress in the next several months. host: greg from union, missouri. caller: why doesn't the american people get the money, $18 billion? if he is going to vote for pakistan to get $18 billion when the american people are suffering throughout the country. here we have another war in
libya. it does not make sense to the american people when we're having a tough time in our economy to put up with giving pakistan money. keep that in mind when you vote next time for the $18 billion. guest: i think you make some good points. the frustration when we seek that things are going poorly. we have on employment and we could use money for infrastructure and money goes abroad. we have to remember that we do have a stake in what happens in pakistan, afghanistan, and places around the world. i think foreign aid helps our friends, helps countries work with us. we already positioned to give foreign aid, we should not be pouring good money after bad.
the foreign aid package is one of appropriation. but the money to afghanistan and pakistan sometimes come in multiples of votes, including defense money and things like that. but the caller makes a good point. i am not for eliminating foreign aid. i don't think we can walk away from pakistan or afghanistan. i think it is a balanced and we need to have some frank talks with the pakistani government. host: chested -- preston from pennsylvania. caller: good morning. i have to say a few things. we send too much money out to people that are our friends when they are in need. once we help them, they give us their behinds to kiss.
we could be suffering from cranial rectum in version -- inversion. i am a former marine. i have seen a lot of things. puerto rico -- how much money goes to them? we send x amount of dollars every year. i am african american. we get sort of a pass because of our history. i am an american. when we were going off the base and the caucasian soldiers and sailors and marines were getting could get drunk and walk off the base and nobody would mess with me. it is setting up a false
security when they come up -- pakistan has nuclear weapons. they don't have the common sense to use it in a correct way. they use it as a hostage. "if you don't give us what we want, we will bomb israel." guest: i understand the frustration. let me remind you that puerto ricans are american citizens just like you and by and they're entitled to all the benefits of american citizens. puerto rico --f border regio they are american citizens. let's remember this. let us not out of our frustration, and it is well placed frustration come with the pakistan government, with the afghanistan government, with the iraqi government -- we are all
very much annoyed at things from time to time. we need to do what is in our self-interest. we don't give aid to pakistan because we love them or because they are threatening to hurt israel or europe or any other country, or india. we don't give aid to pakistan or afghanistan because we think they will do something that will be harmful to us. we give aid because we deem it in our own self interest to not allow iran to dominate that region, to not allow terrorism to gain even more of the threshold, a market foothold that it has now. we give this aid out of the basis what is good for us. i do think that we have to reexamine things.
that is what i think whether we should stay in afghanistan or in a lower capacity is something that we need to look at. host: this is from one of our twitter followers. the a.p. corresponded in islam about is tweeting from the side from where bin laden was found. it is interesting to follow the feed. there is lots of agreement from citizens in the year that their work two guys in the compound who interacted in a minor way with neighbors. some say the neighbors identified themselves as being from pakistan. the men said they were brothers. others said they were cousins. there is agreement they spoke in multiple languages. some say in farsi.
the people we spoke to said they never saw the pakistani army or other officials visit the compound what to believe. twitter working as a way for this correspond to give direct impressions of what is on the ground in abbottabad, in pakistan. some have compared abbottabad in pakistan as the westminster town of islamabad, sort of like the westchester county of new york city. you represent part of westchester counter. guest: i think westchester county is much better than that place in pakistan. on one of the show's last night, they compared one of the towns of rocklin county that i represent. i am glad they are using examples of my district. host: this is an affluent suburb of a bigger city, abbottabad
being a well-to-do suburb of islamabad. guest: that is what i find it absurd that nobody knew where he was. this is not a year after september 11. is nine years after september 11. it seems to me -- you don't get osama bin laden to a place like this with only one person or two people knowing it. there is networks and money involved to keep him alive. there is a compound that was billed. -- there is a compound that was built. there is no way that they could allude -- i think people knew and it goes back to the duplicitous games -- there is no way that they could elude. we need them and they need us. we don't want to be fools and we
will not be fools. host: this story just in from the a.p. when did they know osama bin laden's whereabouts? what is congress' role? you are on the task force of homeland security. guest: there will be hearings. we will want to know what they knew and when the new it. we have a top-secret briefing today, in several hours. i am sure we will learn more there. i always do things with a smell test. this does not pass the smell test with the common-sense tests. the pakistani security agents have always been accused of playing duplicitous in games. india accused them of lots of
things. there's a reason to believe they were involved in those horrific fires and bombings in india. i just think something smells. we will get to the bottom of this. we will not just appropriate money cannot get answers to these questions. it is going to be the cia explaining to members of congress what happened. leon panetta, who president obama has been head of the cia, and he will be the new defense secretary. he was a former member of congress. we served together. i think he is a great guy, confident and smart. i think he has done a great job and he will do a great job as defense secretary. caller: good morning.
i believe the pakistani government was protecting because they had more than 22 people on the compound. if this is an imminent threat to the united states, you think that would be an issue and i have not heard anything spoken about that. there is an open highway -- i have had the opportunity -- i think it is a very big question. it is something that needs to be resolved. i have met a muslim iranians and he said the elephant they know is an -- he said the only thing they know is an iron fist. i don't trust our own government. that is all i have to say. guest: i do think borders or importance and we need to always
do a better job of preventing terror from crossing into borders. i do think for the past several years under two administrations, we have done a good job in preventing terrorism from striking in the heartland of the united states. there are all kinds of plots i contend that have been broken up. we have done a good job -- there are all kinds of plots i can tell you that have been broken up. preventing terrorist attacks. they want to kill us as americans. they don't care what party we belong to or whether we're conservative or liberal or in the middle. if you're an american, these crazy people want to kill us, and we have to band together as americans. we're all proud of the americans. i'm always proud and proud as can be when an event like this
happens, when we are able to get there and show these thugs that we will not be pushed around. we will track them down. they are not saved. they can run from us but they cannot hide. caller: tennis --host: tennessee on the democrat's line. caller: ok. i just want to say that i'm so proud of america. i have always been proud of america. i am also so proud of being a democrat. i will be a democrat till the day that i die. because we get things done. thank you in of a blessed day -- thank you and have a blessed day. guest: i do realize my republican friends care about this country as much as
democrats. we're going to all band together and keep this country say. host: georgia, republican line, hello. dawn. caller: good morning. my question is, if we knew where he is now and other countries have told us from the beginning that he was in pakistan and he was in a fortress, how come we haven't done anything sooner put the lie to keep giving money over to pakistan? and why is it that it is happening all of a sudden right before the big election? guest: i don't think the killing
of osama bin laden has anything to do with elections. it has nothing to do with politics. it was not before the elections. the elections are not till next year. there is no congressional or presidential election this year. i don't think either president, obama or bush, did things because of the election. they did it as an american president and i'm proud of what president obama did. i thought his statement to the american people was right on the money. we need to stop thinking as partisan political people but start thinking as americans. and so, i share the frustration with the needs that we have at home. but we cannot turn our heads to the problems abroad, terrorism abroad. iran has been a major supporter of terrorism, whether it was a
hamas in the middle east or hezbollah in the middle east in lebanon and countries that are terrorist that are attacking israel, or the horrific world trade center, 9/11. they want to do less in -- they want to do us in. again, i would like to know at what point we know he was in those caves on the border and obviously he moved. you're telling me if the move, nobody knew? it took a long time. but wanted to make sure. believe me, i don't think we wasted one day. if we could have gotten him eight years ago, we would have. we got him now and i am glad we did.
host: this is a story from "the new york times." "al qaeda e-mailed lost some of its allure." what is the state of al qaeda? how dominant you feel al qaeda is in our terrorism strategy? guest: we have al qaeda on the run. it is naive for us to think that the killing of one man and does them in it and makes them ineffective. i think the number two person will take over. if we get to him, the number 3 person will take over. there are people who want to take us back to the 10th century. they detest everything western and everything modern. they just want to hurt us. i think that as long as you have
countries like iran, which want to get a nuclear bomb and has lots of money to plan terrorists -- to plant terrorists -- by the way, they are doing this in south america, as well. iran is making waves and inroads in south america, as well. terrorism is probably something that in our generation, we're going to have to cope with for a long time. if we can get osama bin laden and we can do the kinds of things to prevent terrorism, to get -- carry out major attacks come that is what we're doing. i think we're doing a good job. there's great satisfaction that this mass murderer is gone. he can no longer kill people.
host: ray from tampa, florida. caller: good morning. i have an opinion. i agree with not removing all the troops from afghanistan iraq right now. i have been listening to people calling in and twitterers. compromiset to national security. i believe people need to understand the risks and rewards in doing something like that. i do wish the united states would do something different like, we found osama bin laden by strategically using our cia, and we can probably put embassies in iraq and afghanistan, or we can fight
terrorist ill but different where we can afford it instead of putting our $18 billion like what that operation would c ost, to wonder million dollars. -- $200 million. i wish in your meeting you would address how the united states could save money in that way. i know we have to give these countries money and i know what our relationship is in foreign policy and i know that will not stop. i think war should stop. i do believe we could remove all troops from afghanistan -- iraq initially because i do not believe it had anything to do with osama bin laden. guest: you raise some very good points. we give foreign aid because it is in our best interest. i know people disagree.
i'm telling you that we don't give foreign aid out of the goodness of our heart. as a country and as the preeminent world power, we have stakes in what goes on around the world. we want to try to influence will goes on around the world. what affects us at home makes us safer. we deem it in our best interests. with afghanistan and with iraq as well, we have to always reevaluate whether the best way to keep our country safe and go after the taliban and go after al qaeda is by having ground troops on the ground in afghanistan in perpetuity. i don't want us to be bogged down in afghanistan year after year after year.
i do not think that is the best way. i think there might be other ways that my be cheaper and better. host: this is from a maverick on twitter. guest: we are not in afghanistan and pakistan just to have access to aerospace -- airspace. we have those drones the going to pakistani airspace. it would be looked upon as an act of war or provocation frustum up drone's going to their sovereign territory and assassinate people, or to go in and capture osama bin laden. there is one of the benefits of having a relationship with pakistan. we do this because it is in our best interest. host: scott from pennsylvania, republican caller.
turn down your tv. turn it off and we will take your call. caller: that is fine. hold on, please. i am proud to be an american. september 11 happened and what happened to osama bin laden is a great thing. where to the come up with the amounts of aid that each country gets? i understand we have to give aid to the countries four good reasons. but the amount is what bothers me. this country could use some of that money itself. that is my main question. i know different countries get different amounts. guest: there are different things. if you take -- is less than 1% of our total budget. people think it is much greater.
generally the president proposes a level to congress and the congress looks at it, and changes it, moves it up, moves it down, that kind of thing. when we're talking like pakistan and afghanistan, it is not just simply foreign aid. it is defense appropriations. we are fighting wars and they are part and parcel for us. the proposal by the administration and then congress would negotiate and try to change it, either raise its or lower its. -- either raise it or lower it. host: npr has a piece asking if it is wrong to sell bin laden break's death. members of the church have talked about not necessarily
rejoicing over the death over this man. do you have any reservations about the celebrations that are taking place? inspiring others to get riled up based on the u.s. reaction? guest: i don't think it's retribution. you have a mass murderer and i think justice was done. i did not see -- what were you going to do? let him roam free forever? that is not a acceptable. put him in prison for life? that would lead to terrorism. i think the only thing we could do is to take him out. i do not rejoice in it, but on the other hand, i do. i don't think it will make terrorism goal way -- go away.
our people were murdered in cold blood for nor reason then that there were americans. i think he had it coming to him and i am glad we did it. host: thank you for being with us. coming up next, we'll speak with representative rob wittman. first a news update from c-span radio. >> white house counterterrorism director predict adviser john brennan says the obama administration is determined to pummel the rest of al qaeda and that this was some kind of support now osama bin laden work for inside pakistan. mr. brennan said the latest information from the bin laden raid was that he was in the
compound for the past five or six years. president obama plans to visit new york city on thursday to mark the death of bin laden. he will visit ground zero and he will meet with families of those killed nearly 10 years ago. the repercussions on the pakistan raid from around the world today. britain should be extra vigilant against terrorism following the death of bin laden. five men were arrested near a nuclear plant in england. >> congratulations to all the winners of this year's studentcam documentary entries. continued the conversation at our facebook and twitter pages. the theme next year is the u.s. constitution.
create a video on why it is important to you. >> you are watching c-span. every morning, it is "washington journal," connected with elected officials and journalists. weeknights, congressional hearings and policy forms. supreme court arguments. on the weekend, you can see our signature interview programs. "the communicators" on saturdays. you can also watch our programming anytime at c- span.org. it is all searchable at are the video library. c-span, washington your way. >> "washington journal" continues.
host: congressman rob wittman is from virginia. good morning. you just returned from a trip to afghanistan and pakistan a month ago. you met with the president of pakistan. guest: we had a good discussions with the president. when we were there, there was a heightened sense of anti- american feelings because of the raymond davis incident. there was a predator drone strike where there were some -- the koran was burned in florida. we emphasize that because we know and pakistan -- there are significant contributors of
extremism and terrorism exploits in afghanistan, and we know we will not be successful in afghanistan without a strong partner in pakistan. we talked about the forces that pakistan is committing to the battle against extremism, especially in the northwest frontier provinces, those areas. those are significant concerns to us because of the activities that are going on there. it seemed to us that their forces are being spread thin, where they could not continue to pursue in an offensive manner other forces or other extremist forces within the area. so we had some candid discussions with the president and the general, who commands the pakistani army. in talking to him about his concerns and they have concerns about india. many of their forces are also deployed on the india-pakistani
border. we were there to emphasize the importance of battling extremists and the -- we know there significant contributors to the violence and evarts of extremism in afghanistan. those are the ones that are there fighting our men and women on the ground in the eastern and southern regions of afghanistan. host: the present defense pakistan's role. this is the first time he has come not about pakistan's role. how surprised or you that osama bin laden was found in a well- to-do suburb? guest: we were just there. it is surprising. it is concerned he was able to live there undetected in an area where there are a number of military retirees. you think in some point somebody would have a suspicion about how that compound was place.
i think it brings up a number of questions that we need to answer. we need to approach the pakistani is about that. an incident like this i think chitons are concerned about their efforts in combating extremism -- an incident like our i think huygeeightens concern about their efforts in combating the extremism. in the way that they gather intelligence. i understand they have been helpful in gathering intelligence for this operation. but not to the extent that you would expect them to do with osama bin laden living in areas such as this, an area where you think he could be easily detected or lease something would be an alert to the pakistani is about this particular compound. host: should we be sending as much aid to pakistan? guest: we need to reevaluate
what pakistan is accomplishing. it is always good that we revisit our relationships with countries and especially the amount of aid that we're sending their and the result of what that aid may be coming out with. i think it is good for us to ask the tough questions about what they're doing and then looking very closely at the congress in our spending decision about how that aid is being utilized and what is being used to bolster the relationships and what is it being used for in the war ought extremism. host: as you look what happened over the weekend, does it change your perspective on our relationship with pakistan? guest: it raises my concern. i want to understand the details about what information we get
from the pakistani. it is easy to rush to judgment. we need to have pakistan be a strong partner. they are a nuclear power. the u.s. and pakistan need to be strong powers. now is the time to be able to question that relationship and what the pakistan is are doing in concert with the united states in ballot extremism. >host: becky in ohio. caller: my first question is about pakistan. should be some kind of sanctions against somebody when they investigate how much they did not want to know about obama -- him being there? how would they have his dna to be able to determine for sure if it was shim?
do you think there was too much information revealed about them taking computers and having all that information? don't they feel that to be detrimental to any further investigation? guest: those are great questions. as far as revealing the intelligence that they gathered, i think it is purposeful. the intelligence committee is pretty -- what this does is create that level of uncertainty within the al qaeda and no work as to what information the u.s. has about their operations. by human nature, that will cause a hesitancy within al qaeda with whatever efforts they may have to perpetrate effort we have killed osama bin laden. i know there is a purpose behind that. we have not devolves the specifics of the intelligence that we have gathered. we have a significant amount of intelligence.
as far as the dna match, i am certain the intelligence committee has gathered dna from their intelligence-gathering with osama bin laden. i know they have a repository of dna samples that used as comparison. they probably had that on hand. as far as sanctions against pakistan, that is premature. we should have candid, thoughtful discussions with the leadership in pakistan. we had very frank and direct conversations with the general and president zardari about their efforts against extremism. what commitments they are going to make in working with the u.s. on those efforts. i do think this is a time for us to post those tough questions. if they are going to be a partner with us, there needs to be a level of trust. this is a time when we need to
be questioning what they are doing. int they're doing in concert the united states trip i think it is a critical time to introduce those frank discussions. it falls short of sanctions. i think conversations need to be productive but frank in how we deal with afghanistan. host: leesburg, virginia -- williamsburg, virginia. caller: i have a concern about some of the special education funds that are being spent in our schools. a grant that was awarded to the county schools, a physical fitness and health program grant. herein at williamsburg, that grant is not being afforded to businesses like my own, which is certified business with over 1000 school site visits.
i often leave school with the children give me a grade of a- plus and the parents being excited. what i do is bring mobile fitness centers to school. there are 30 stationary bicycles that fit children as young as three. i eliminate the capital expense and heating, cooling, busing, and have been measured outcome, and if these programs are all mysteries because staff does not know what to do. they are spending all this money on consultants and excessive trent that does not impact the classroom or the health of the children. host: let's get a response from our guest. guest: we want to make sure that on any grant, the money is producing results perk it sells like one of your efforts is an
effective effort i would be glad to look into that see how your efforts are being utilized. we want to make sure with the fitness and children that we're looking at all the different options to increase physical activity and to focus on diet. it sounds like this is something that would be significant. we're glad to look into that and also talk with the officials in that area. i have the opportunity yesterday to visit a facility that was putting on these training as part of tiff grant per i want to understand more about what you're bringing to the table. thank you. host: congressmen journal@c- is the chairman of the subcommittee on oversight and armed services. this story profiling navy seals in your state. this from "the washington times."
it talks about the folks who are stationed at the naval air station in the heart of virginia beach. they spent months practicing the operation to kill osama bin laden, which involves landing inside the compound in afghanistan. host: it is behind the scenes and people in virginia beach talked about the will not be a big public welcoming for them because their work is confidential. guest: we are so proud to have them in virginia. they are a distinguished group of warriors. they don't want that notice. they are very humble and they know that is their job. i have visited with them. they are very very focused on the mission. they know they are not there for
public notice. they are there to get the job done. we were so glad to have them. i know from a security standpoint, they are not really interested in having a lot of people know what they do or where they are doing it. they are very humble warriors. host: caller in washington, d.c. caller: i was curious -- why is it so important to have a dialogue with basically bedouin cultures that keep their people repressed and they don't educate them? where did the get all their armaments? they basically -- i know that opium is a big deal there. but what is the importance of having this dialogue with them? guest: if we want them to pursue
education and we want them to expand their scope and how they deal with other nations, i think you have to have those dialogues. with us being an economic border with pakistan and with the foreign aid we provide them, it is incumbent upon us to have those discussions if we hope to improve the human condition with them. i do think those things are productive. they are in nuclear power. we want to make sure we have productive conversations with them. we do not want to be on the with countries like afghanistan or india. women not always agree end -- we may not always agree. that does not need we should shy away from engaging with pakistan honest in what i believe is an opportunity for us in the future to help them move forward and to
move forward the cause of ballot extremism around the world. host: a democrat from shikar growth, -- from chicago, carl. caller: pakistan, the states to have no sense of their own security. i don't think congress should be talking about questioning them when we have been there for the past few years violating the policy with their creditor drones and special forces unit. we got wanted. instead of making them whipping just leave it alone. guest: we want to acknowledge the times when they have helped us. the bell for extremism goes on.
we got what we wanted -- the battle for extremism goes on. we got what we wanted with osama bin laden. there is a continual threat. those folks are fighting paratroops, providing a significant challenge. i think we have to continue to engage and make sure that the effort to battle extremism around the " is a joint venture, and make sure that pakistan is making it proper commitment. even though this is a significant milestone, it is not the end. in many instances, folks think it will reinvigorate up tied it in their efforts against free nations around the world, which means we have to heighten our diligent to combat terrorism. host: the white house is considering releasing photos of bin laden's body.
should that be done? guest: you have to do that in the thoughtful and respectful way. they will have to be careful in how the release of those fighters. this is an issue of such note that i think you have to have something to confirm in people's minds that this indeed did occur and that so they know from themselves by some kind of official confirmation that osama bin laden was killed. host: how would that be done? do you have concerns about people in pakistan being offended by that photo ? guest: folks from congress should be able to confirm that it was osama bin laden. they did see the dna analysis. you should start there.
you have to be thoughtful about heidi reveal the additional information. i understand the photos are fairly graphic. you don't want to incite more extremism by releasing these photos. you want to provide a sense that indeed this was osama bin laden that was killed during this operation. host: members of congress want closed-door briefing today. what do you want to hear out of that? do you want to see a picture at this point? guest: i do want to know if this was indeed osama bin laden. i would like to learn more details about the operation. and then the future challenges we will face. where do we believe al qaeda will now reemerge? where do we believe leadership will fill in? this is a milestone.
it is not a completion of that. i want to hear about the specific information but also about the next steps, where we're going from here in the battle against extremism. host: judy from maryland, welcome. caller: i am concerned about countries that burnt my flag and spit in my eye and deride americans the way hamid karzai has done. we're giving them billions while regular americans cannot survive. i have a relative who lost a job. had to use certification 401-k -- had to use her 401-k and retirement money. we know that gaddafi has billions of dollars. we know that karzai is walking off with money. how far to the american people have to go to say what the
founding fathers said, and that was, do not get embroiled in foreign politics? guest: it is a time for us to examine every place that we are examined in. we're on the way to reducing our presence there. we have to do that. the engagement in libya is something that many in congress have questions about. but get the initial assertion -- what are we doing with the resources we are placing around the world in relation to what we're doing in the united states? we need to be focusing on job creation and the economy. those are fundamentalists in what we are expected to do. we should be assertive about where we are providing either assistance or whether we're asserting ourselves around the world. the libya issue calls into question our involvement there. looking at our involvement in
afghanistan and making sure we're responsibly reducing our efforts there in a thoughtful way but in a way that does not fritter away the accomplishes we have been able to achieve and making sure we hand it over to an afghan government. a big issue is corruption. we have addressed that with leadership. we address that with parliamentarians. we're going to be in a situation to hopefully provide them back a country that is more secure. it is up to the afghans as to whether or not they are going to address corruption. we can continue to press them diplomatically and other ways to would address corruption and make sure we did not settle in any shape or form for corruption that avoids u.s. corruption. if the -- is the afghanistan government that has to stamp out corruption. there are questions about the
administration and we continue to push those issues to make sure corruption is addressed, as well as what our efforts are resulting in and what their presence will be now and then the teacher. we are contract to move out of afghanistan by 2014. everything i've heard shows the progress and we're on the time from to be able to do that. we will begin that in july of this year, that drawdown. host: congressman rob wittman, republican of virginia, just returned about a month ago from a trip to pakistan and afghanistan. you mentioned libya. this has gone and buried in the news because of the story about the killing of osama bin laden. there is a story today in "the washington post."
what is your feeling about what is happening in libya and the role of nato? guest: it brings up some questions about what our mission is there. we have been asking that all along. what we hope to achieve? i think those are pertinent questions. the question is, what is our relationship with the rebels? who are the rebels? what are they accomplishing? if the effort is to advance human rights there, then you have to question some of the more recent episodes. i think all of those are questions that have to be entered. i think congress needs to be involved. it goes back to the war powers act and whether congress should have been involved in the initial decision to go into libya. i appreciate the effort that we
will not introduce ground forces. we can see a significant effect in the country. what is our policy? what is the mission? it does not seem to be clear. then with no determined outcome as far as what we want to achieve. then you tend to flounder. i think it is something we need to be addressing. you have to question who is making the questions and what we're hoping to accomplish by this. if it is not to remove gaddafi come out what is the endgame -- if it is not to remove gaddafi, what is the endgame? caller: osama bin laden is a citizen of saudi arabia.
the results of 9/11 affected four countries. osama bin laden being a citizen of a prominent family in saudi arabia, which is number one oil- producing country in the world. there is -- what i'm trying to say is, he says his intent was religious, but it seems financial, to me, because what he started -- if the look at saudi arabia from the results of 9/11, who was benefited the most, most likely saudi arabia because all the oil. the oil prices shot up when we had iraq.
there wasn't but one of been a fishery from that analyst saudi arabia. guest: i look at it this way -- there wasn't one beneficiary, and that was saudi arabia. guest: they are an ideologically-driven organization and they are seeking to pursue a jihad against those folks they considered infidels. i think there's much more to it then potentially an economic connection. i think the economic impact is probably an outcome of their particular effort. i'm not convinced that an economic benefit to saudi arabia is the impetus behind osama bin laden's efforts. al qaeda is more than just osama bin laden. it was just an economic inches for saudi arabia, this effort would have fizzled out a long time ago. host: matt writes on twitter --
guest: i think there is some concern about the information we share with pakistan. in the past, the concern has been well we shared intelligence with pakistan and that we went to pursue those targets. those targets or were there. the efforts that pakistan is putting forward in keeping the intelligence security make sure that it stays actionable -- i think the united states wanted to make sure that beyond a shadow of a doubt, we would increase the likelihood of osama bin laden and being there based on intelligence. the more people you share it with, the more likely it is that someone had doubled his information, and with as high a
value as osama bin laden is to the united states and those battling extremism, i don't think we could risk that. it is based on historical relationships with pakistan, where we have shared intelligence before and the intelligence has been leaked. that is the basis for us going in without sharing it, before we went in with pakistan. host: galveston, texas. michael joins us. caller: thank you for joining us. host: go ahead. caller: ok. i didn't hear anybody. just one thing -- i am sure that our government can see through the smoke screen caller: i believe that pi -- i i'm sure that our government can see through the smoke screen. i believe that bin laden has
been in pakistan for years, and we are giving pakistan money. americans are suffering. we pay a bully protect us. they should be paying us to protect them. host: we got the gist of his comments -- they should be paying us to protect them. guest: the compound and what was going on there, near the military installation, and homes of a retired military personnel -- all of those things bring up questions for us, questions we want to engage the pakistanis about. we also, in providing foreign aid, need to investigate and the use of that foreign aid and what it is doing in their efforts to combat extremism. this brings up a number of questions that need to be answered. host: congressman rob wittman,
chairman of the armed services committee on oversight, one of the tasks you up and working on this mismanagement at arlington national cemetery. what have you found? guest: there are a lot of concerns there. gross mismanagement, lack of accountability. we want to make sure that those efforts that have gone on to try to correct those have actually corrected the problems. i am not convinced that that has. host: what are some of the worst things that you saw? guest: we saw a retired air force colonel come in and tell a story that to me was just heart wrenching. he visited this inventory for four years to visit his wife -- visited the cemetery for four years to visit his wife. one whole issue came up identification of remains and weather the headstones were there and marked the site, he
called arlington, wanted to make sure, "is my wife very where the headstones says she is as " they said yes. later, but he got a call and they said, "we are not certain she is buried there." can you imagine going to greet your loved one and not knowing -- grieve your loved one and not knowing if they are there? it is just unacceptable. it is unconscionable that at arlington cemetery, where our ,ation's heroes are injuterred that we cannot make sure that those rains are properly identified. the system is so mismanaged that i can go down the list. if you look at an effort to make sure that we have a workable, accurate system to catalog remains, that still has not happened. they are working to digitize it,
but they have not gotten anywhere close. what happens tomorrow it the paper records system is damaged or, lord forbid, damaged beyond recognition so we cannot go back to determine whether -- to determine where the remains are located. previous administrators have since retired and have not in any way, shape or form been held accountable they have a letter of reprimand on their file, and once they retire, the letter is taken out of the file. the only excuse they get is that under civil service protections, that is all we can do on a there, the question is whether or not it is criminal. why is it to the inspector general -- why isn't it inspector general in an aggressively going after these individuals to determine if there is misconduct? 18 months is certainly long enough to figure that out, and if not, provide a report as to
investigating whether it is criminal conduct. people there that have allowed this to occur needed to be held accountable. secondly, as quickly as possible, this mismanagement needs to be corrected. we get stories of progress, but insufficient progress. we still have the stories of misidentified it remains, as mark remains, misplaced remains. to me that is acceptable. the only thing that is acceptable is 100% certainty for every family that has a loved one interred there that the greatest mark exactly where the remains are. host: what can your oversight committee do about this? guest: we continue to gather information and get calls on a daily basis from folks concerned about this. i get calls from veterans who say, "rob, i thought i was going to have my remains interred at
arlington, but now i don't know if i can at." host: what you think happened? guest: lack of attention, mismanagement, bordering on corruption, criminal behavior. i don't want to cast judgment, but the ig needs to do the investigation and get that information to us. a pattern of mismanagement, for years it went on, and a total lack of attention. how anybody at this place -- at this nation's place of highest honor for this nation's heroes, why we let it get to that point -- we have to make sure it does not extend past the this, and that we fix these problems. that is incumbent upon us on the oversight investigation subcommittee. we will continue to work to make sure those things happen. i am working with the committee
chairman, too. it is time to continue to bring this to the forefront. it is absolutely unacceptable. the progress made at this point i don't think in anybody's mind is acceptable. we have to make sure that 100% of the grave sites there are properly identified, and that the people who have caused this to happen are held accountable without question. we owe that to this nation's veterans, this nation's heroes. this is a place we call in the highest regard as far as honoring our veterans. let's make sure we get it right and get it done now. host: congressman robert wittman represents fredericksburg and yorktown to . staten island, new york, democrats' line. caller: i would like to speak to the issue on foreign aid. while most people think that most of this goes to humanitarian reasons, a great
amount of it goes to defense. it is kind of a reciprocal thing. munitions companies, airplanes, etc., are being sold to the government, and if they are turned out and given to these foreign countries. it is the greatest recent president, republican president, dwight d. eisenhower, warned, about the vast military- industrial complex brought tremendous amount of money, as i said, is a reciprocal thing. it helps us in a way because it provides jobs for some of these states that produce these weapons. host: certainly some of the dollars go in those ways, and when we were there, we had conversations with pakistani air
force and pakistani army about the to combat extremism there -- about the things they needed to, extremism there. we need to make sure, too, that it is in the interest of the united states and that we're not giving away advanced hardware that we have developed. they advanced predator grounds, not acceptable to us with the technology in those drones. there has been back-and-forth about how we accomplish that, but those things have been done brought some of those dollars go into those areas of military hardware, but it is done and at what a way to make sure that military hardware can be used to the pakistanis' benefit, but also to make sure that if it falls into the wrong hands, it cannot be used against the united states. there is a limited scope as to how the hardware is provided, and when i was there, what they
saw as the needs, what the united states could do as far as helping them was to provide provision of military hardware. host: as someone on the armed services committee and chairs the oversight subcommittee on that, you have weighed in on the defense cuts and the budget proposed by secretary gates. you say you want to see more efficiency in the military, but that the secretary's proposals lacked sort of the strategic plan, a thoughtful analysis. what does that mean, and what are your concerns? guest: my concerns are this -- we have to have good information by which to make budgeting decisions, and that requires the secretary of defense to give us accurate assessments of what the threats are rather well and what strategically we need to do to meet those threats. when we put in place efficiency initiatives, we need to make sure dollars are being put to directly to combat those
threats. if we are not directly access i -- assessing what those threats are, it is difficult to make decisions. last year, the quadrennial defense for you, the assessment of what those threats are, was staged by an independent panel that we asked to review it as a train wreck. it is very inaccurate as to what the threats are. our push is to make sure that the secretary of defense provide is accurate and timely information about those threats. in the months and years to come, we will have to make tough decisions about where defense spending is placed. it is tough to do that if you don't have those priority pieces of information to determine what is the most immediate threat and how to become that at that, what are the capabilities to me that, what are the costs of the capabilities. that is what we are lacking right now. i am looking forward to working with the incoming secretary of defense, leon panetta, with
that, as well as secretary gates as he finishes his tenure. host: what you think of the lineup that president obama announced last week? guest: we look forward to working with them. we want to get briefed on what their ideas are, and now with the general petraeus at the cia, have a tremendous amount of respect for the general and he will do a great job there. we look forward to working with them as they put in place and make sure they are addressing the many issues we have to deal with. pakistan, and a secretary panetta now coming in, secretary-select coming to the department or defense, and the current strategy is in
afghanistan, libya, and iraq. host: events in florida. -- vince in florida. caller: i grew up in jersey and watch those towers, off. bin laden and finally got his. but i watch your show and i see the billions going to foreign aid. i am 67, on social security, unfortunately got knocked outt 55 on disability. i have this money going out, and i don't understand why the country isn't taking care of their own. i have not gotten a raise in social security in three years. the countries that don't like us are getting billions of dollars. i don't quite understand it. host: i want to start with your
comment about our men and women in uniform. we are honored beyond all comparison as to our armed forces and ever since they put forward. we need to keep them in mine each and every day, honor their service, bank their families for their sacrifice korea to -- thank their families for their sacrifice. we would not be where we are today without the sacrifice of the military and their families. we saw just this week and on sunday, the best example of their sacrifice and commitment to this nation in putting themselves in harm's way to do what is best for this nation. let's always remember our military. that is a great point. as far as the issue of a foreign aid, you put that in the context of other decisions we have to make in the budgeting process, i think you are right. we have to look at where the dollars go in this nation, what are the dollars we have to sustain our budget. we are going to have to ask a very difficult questions about
every korea to up spending, foreign aid included, -- every area of the spending, foreign aid including, and look at whether we can continue to afford that. there is no way we can sustain these current budget deficits, $1.60 trillion now annually, and the national debt of $14.30 trillion. that makes the question of where the cuts come from. we will have to address everything top to bottom. you talk about medicare and social security benefits. we have to address those systems, in addition to medicaid, foreign aid, national defense. all those need to be on the table to make sure we're getting on a path to sustainability. what you bring up as far as difficult decisions we have to make, the provision of foreign aid has to be one of those areas that we look into a question. host: james in indianapolis. guest: hello, james.
caller: i support all congressmen and senators efforts in the united states. i hear a lot of the callers that call in, and they don't trust the government, they don't trust the u.s. navy seals, the u.s. blackhawk pilots. they don't trust any of the people. it is just upsetting that so many people in the united states don't trust the government anymore. i am quite sure that alpal qaeda and osama bin laden, if he were still alive, would be very pleased that the people don't trust the government. i have got your back, whether you are a democrat, republican. i respect everybody. i was drafted in 1956. i did not want to go, but i did, because my father fell in pearl harbor.
i just don't understand what has happened to patriotism in this country. sometimes i think that maybe everybody should be drafted before they start life as a worker, just to find out about the government and how it works. you can trust the people that are elected. there are liars -- liars, cheats and criminals don't become senators and presidents. guest: thank you so much for your trust that you place in your elected officials and military. i think folks across the board deeply admire the commitment that our men and women into this nation. i want to thank you and your father. we have to make sure that we focus each and every day, turning people's trust, and there have been indications that people have not been in that situation of being trustworthy. i would be the first to admit that we have seen some of that
in the past. it is easy to label every member of congress with in that realm. what we have to do is make sure all of us in congress measure up to the highest standards and never forget who we serve, and that is the people. we are your servants, and we serve in your trust. if we continue to earn your trust, i believe that the questions about what we do and how we do it will center on just what we should or should not be doing from a matter of choice, not a matter of whether somebody trusts us in that what we see is what gets done. we have got a significant challenges. that cost element comes up each and every day, 4-- that trust element comes up each and every day, for us to earned the trust and tackle these problems. that is the way to reach instill trust in the nation's government. i am always eyeglass-half-full guy, and i look at the challenges we pass in front of us in that as we have in the past, we will come together to meet those challenges and do
what is best for this nation. we are blessed to have our men and women in note form served this nation and do such a great job to ensure our freedoms and liberties. host: thomas joins us from indebid to become independent line. -- from virginia beach, independent line. caller: while the congressman was a lot about what they would like to do, is example of the arlington cemetery problems pretty much illustrate on a very micro-scale what is wrong in washington in the sense that it should not take well wants to sell such a problem -- it should not take 12 months to solve such a problem, or more than 12 months. how would the congressman feel about a system where you could go your position and say, well, congressman is in charge of this
particular issue, and we will docked your pay x percent because you didn't solve this problem? guest: accountability is critical. for members of congress, accountability is critical, and that is one of the focuses of the oversight investigation hearing and washington, to make sure that folks are accountable. you are exactly right, it has been 18 months since these inconsistencies and mismanagement have been uncovered. that is enough to get back on track and make sure that every set of remains is identified and that the record system is beyond reproach and that folks are held accountable. you are right, it is a severe problem, why hasn't it been corrected? myself, as chairman of the oversight investigations subcommittee, it is my responsibility to make sure we continue to bring that to life, all those folks in the army and secretary's office i like accountable for results, making
sure that those folks who of -- army and secretary's office in arlington accountable for results, making sure that those folks are held accountable. i am working with the chairman of the committee to make sure that those things are done. accountability has to go from top to bottom, for myself as the subcommittee chairman and the folks in the secretary of the army's office and the folks who manage arlington. host: rob wittman represent a va's third district and he is a republican. thank you for joining us this morning not coming up, we will talk about al -- thank you for joining us this morning. coming up, we will talk about al qaeda and what is next for that organization. first, a news update from c-span radio. >> a publication, "the african review," reports that security has been heightened at the kenya
home of president obama's grandmother. the decision was made to increase security for relatives of the bus and after receiving threats of planned terrorist attacks -- relatives of the president after receiving threats of planned terrorist attacks three days ago. demonstrations and the gaza strip are declaring said the four osama bin laden. many are opposed to bin laden at's ideology, but opposed his killing and consider him a martyr. former solicitor general ted olson, speaking earlier on nbc's "today show," says he feels a great sense of relief and release now that osama bin laden is dead. he went on to say that "a malignancy in the world has been removed." his wife, commentator barbara
olson, was killed in the september 11 attacks. those are some of the headlines on c-span radio. >> congratulations again to all winners of this year's studentcam documentary competition. you can review all the videos any time on our website, studentcam.org, and continue the conversation on our facebook and twitter pages. look for details at our new studentcam 2012 website starting august 1. you are watching c-span, bringing you politics and public affairs. every morning, it is "washington journal," connecting you with elected officials, policy makers, and journalists. weekdays, courage of the house, and weeknights, policy forums, supreme court oral arguments in. on the weekends, you can see "the communicators," "q&a," and
"prime minister's questions" from the british house of commons. it is all searchable at our c- span a video library. c-span, washington your way. it public service treated by america's cable companies. -- a public service created by america's cable companies. >> "washington journal" continues. host: andrew exum joins us, a fellow at the center for a new american security. you were an army ranger and work for general mcchrystal. what does the death of osama bin laden meat for al qaeda -- mean for al qaeda? guest: they plan terror attacks for the af-pak region and
abroad. operationally, this will not have much impact. sophisticated terrorist organizations like al qaeda -- the operational effect that these decapitation campaigns have is minimal. as far as strategic affects, that remains to be seen. it is too early to tell what effect the death of osama bin laden will have on al qaeda as a movement, will have on their recruitment, will have on perceptions of the united states, perceptions of al qaeda. i think that al qaeda's star had already been on the wane throughout the arabic-speaking world, at least. the death of osama bin laden is almost a footnote to the winning -- waning of al qaeda in arabic-speaking world. host: you are talking about needing to see things play out, but the taliban -- effort is
made in afghanistan. can this at a dif -- candace have any implication there? guest: it might have an impact in ways that don't have anything to do with al qaeda. there is a fear among afghan leaders as well as pakistan eights -- pakistanis that osama bin laden is dead, and the reason that the united states went there and the first place, and there is fear that america will now leave afghanistan. that might be quite useful when it comes to getting the afghans to do things that we think that afghan leaders need to do in order to get afghanistan to be a viable country could with respect to pakistan, again, part of the problem has been at the center race in pakistan. -- has been the sanctuaries in pakistan. given the way a somewhat belated was living and has now been
killed, the united states -- given the way osama bin laden was living and now has been killed, the united states now has a bridge. he did not die in some cave in the northwest province or the federally administered tribal areas. he died living relatively quite well, and seemed to be living well for some time. there are questions that u.s. policy-makers will have with their pakistani counterparts, and we have leverage over the pakistanis that we have not had for some time. host: there is an op-ed in "the new york times" to date by richard clarke -- "bin laden's dead. al qaeda's not." guest: i think with respect to the arabic-speaking world, when i left afghanistan in 2004, my last tour as a uniformed
military officer, i spent the next five years in lebanon and egypt. returning to egypt just a few months ago for the revolution, it was remarkable degree to which al qaeda is not really an issue in the arabic-speaking world, and the radical extremist brand of islam espoused by al qaeda was really a non-factor, and a lot of the things taking place in libya and syria and egypt. there has been a degree of rejection of that ideology, which was never that popular to begin with. however, richard clarke is correct when he says that al qaeda is still the danger. al qaeda's affiliate's remain somewhat strong, a small but dedicated cadre of supporters throughout not just the arabic- speaking world, but europe and indonesia, maybe. these groups maintain
operational capability that we shouldn't underestimate. host: michigan, richard joins us. republican line. caller: good morning. i've got a question for your guest. he has been over there in the arab countries and he was in the army and everything else, so he surely knows that bin laden died in 2001 and that this whole thing is just an incredible propaganda stunt. the media is complicit in it. it is time for america to start seeing through this stuff. i wish he would stand up right now and be a patriot and say, " hey, man, you are being lied to. this guy was murdered. ben is yo -- benazir bhutto, before she was murdered, and we allowed that to happen because we supported the other guy.
guest: there will be reversed not just in the arabic-speaking world, but also in the in the state's -- and elsewhere there will be rumors not just in the arabic speaking world but in the united states that osama bin laden is not really dead. i assure the caller that i spent a good deal of my life trying to kill or capture osama bin laden and it was after 2001. we have not been able to be successful until just now, and we can and our special operating forces that we were successful a few days ago. host: what were the effects of releasing the photographs of osama bin laden dead, or releasing video footage of the burial at sea to as far as carter -- as far as garner a reaction in the muslim world? guest: the same reaction as releasing the long-form
birth certificate of the president. i was watching al jazeera yesterday, and the death of osama bin laden was reported as fact, but you will always have a small dedicated minority of people for whom the prevailing narrative is not satisfactory. you of conspiracy theories no matter what -- evidence is -- you will have conspiracy theories no matter what evidence is produced. it is understood that he died bloodily, but for obvious reasons, you do not want to release footage of a person who died of a gunshot wound to the head. not a pretty picture, not something that we want splashed across the front pages of papers around the world. host: tim in michigan, a democrat. caller: how you doing? i think it is crazy. we released photos of our own president being shot in the head. how could you say that?
thanks for the seals, they are great, they are awesome. i have watched them worked out. kudos to them. they are the tip of the sword, the samurais of today. first off, to think that osama bin laden was killed in 2001 is ludicrous. it took a man who wasn't in business with the bin laden family to get him, and it happened to be at democrat, it happened to be our president right now, obama. he did a great job, and i want to thank him, and i want to thank all the servicemen. i would like them to come on, and i would like to help find some of the victims from alabama. they are missing. there is a lot of work to be
done in the united states. as far as pakistan goes, cut their aid. we don't have to help everybody in the world and we don't have to pay that interest rate that we pay china to do it. but anyway, thanks to the military for everything you have done. guest: certainly, it is a moment to really thank not just the seals but all the special operations units involved in this operation. i completely understand the caller's focus on the tragedies in alabama, and not just alabama, but my home town of chattanooga, where 70 people were killed in and around my home town. i understand the sentiment, to just want to bring the boys home. first off, the collar's praise of the president seems to be a spot on. it appears that president obama
made a tough and gutsy call and conducted this operation with the utmost to rationalism, everything we expected the president to do -- but most professionalism, everything expected the president to do. even though we were distracted with the challenges of al qaeda and afghanistan and the war in iraq, president bush also made a good-faith effort to track down the osama bin laden. host: andrew exum was an adviser to general stanley mcchrystal and was active duty in the army. as a fellow at the center for a new american security, you have a blog. you talk -- year reflect a little bit on our screen -- i have a little bit of on our screen -- your reactions to
osama bin laden being killed, from your experience as a veteran fred can you share what happened and what you did? guest: i left the army in 2004, went to graduate school, studied terrorist movements, insurgent movements, and everything i had learned in books and seen on the ground suggest that decapitation campaigns don't really matter. they don't have an operational effect on the organization. i told myself for years, even if we killed osama bin laden, it would not matter to al qaeda. i was surprised by my own personal reaction to the news. i got a text message from my cousin, on leave from the marine corps, here in washington visiting his girlfriend, and within 10 minutes the two of us were at the bar. within half an hour, we were joined by a dozen other veterans of iraq and afghanistan, killing around and remembering those --
i couldn't be there a few nights ago -- it was pretty emotional experience. the operational effect on al qaeda is not very significant. however, the strategic air act is too early to see -- strategic effect is too early to see. i have seen the effect this has had on our own rao, the fight against al qaeda. we will see what type of act this as against the enemy's morrell. host: josh, california, independent line. caller: first of all, i want to say as a disclaimer that i do not downplay sacrifices that servicemen make. you know, if i or someone else or even themselves don't appreciate the experience that is part of the nature of war -- i do want make a comment about
what you said about the ability of the current administration to track down osama bin laden. what i am interested in as far as information -- they are always talking about the forensics of this, how long he has been living there. i will leave that at that, but i also wanted to comment about what you said about pakistan's leverage as a result of having at mr. bin laden in the country, presuming that mr. bin laden had been there for a very long time, which i assume that he has. i am very upset at his death. revealing him to be there is not going to give pakistan less leverage in the world -- host: josh, why are you upset about this? caller: i am a very religious
person. i was raised in jewish, celebrated different holidays, and truly religious people are few and far between, and you don't fight them off. when you do find them, the saddest part is that there are so many people that they would not recognize as true, godly person -- host: we will leave it there. guest: i wanted to ask a follow- up question -- you felt sympathy for osama bin laden and saw him as a man of faith. i think osama bin laden is an evidence of how faith can be distorted and. it can be beautiful in islam or to deism or christianity, but it can be a terrific thing -- islam or judaism or christianity, but it can be a horrific thing.
we pray for the victims of al qaeda and have them in our hearts as we go forward. host: counterterrorism adviser john brennan said u.s. officials hope to build on the killing of osama bin laden and to destroy the al qaeda terrorist organization. guest: killing of osama bin laden has a limited effect, but the intelligence that they perhaps collected in the state house has the potential to be very significant. if anything, the special operations forces and intelligence community can pat themselves on the back for maybe a few minutes after this success, but they have got a lot more to do and now they have a lot more material to drive operations. whenever you are conducting identify your targeting and
special operations, it is all intelligence driven. you can only do what you have the intelligence to do, and there is a chance, as we collect and exploit the intelligence that was gathered by the field scene that killed osama bin laden, we could have a much more devastating effect on the senior leadership and on al qaeda operations going forward. that is a very encouraging thing. host: south carolina. nina joins us. caller: how are you both this morning? guest: doing quite well. caller: i appreciate the previous callers, but i wanted to say to the two of you, andrew, those who have been affected in your home town, i am sorry to hear about that. thank you, host, for having this conversation. i certainly agree that our troops have done an excellent job i commend their part of
birds and their work -- it speaks the -- i comment their hard efforts and their work. it speaks to the power of americans, whether you are republican or democrat, the tremendous potential we have to come together and combat terrorism. i am struck by the way we learned of osama bin laden's death. that is a day that reminded you what it is to be an american, whether you are a republican or democrat or independent my heart goes out to the families of those affected on 9/11. i think the death of osama bin laden is it will come -- some form of closure to them. you were able to accomplish this tremendous milestone, and thank you both for having this conversation . guest: sure thing, nina.
this is a moment for americans to come together, and we shouldn't be too triumphant and crow too much about the death of this one man, but it is an opportunity to feel good about the men and women who are in harm's way and have done so much to combat al qaeda and disrupt al qaeda since 2001. that is certainly a moment to feel good as an american. i agree with you wholeheartedly. host: "the new york times" has a story -- it talks about a second in command. talk about their relationship and what he brings to the table that osama bin laden did not. guest: i think it is too early to talk about it will take the mantle of osama bin laden red obviously, the focus is on zawahiri, the no. 2, egyptian doctor, often seen as an organ as th -- as an organizer, not
as charismatic. his organization is not nearly as successful in terms of gatherings of the. bin laden really did have -- he was quite charismatic. even people with no sympathy for al qaeda at will listen to -- would listen to and watch his tapes. it is difficult to see who takes his mantle going forward, and to see how al qaeda will change. whether it will become more operationally diffuse, will continue this trend towards having the local franchises, on the arabian peninsula or in north africa. i would be cautious in saying about how things are going to change in the short term or near term. i have a feeling the stories we are writing a year from now will not look like the stories we are writing 2448 hours afterwards.
host: republican caller. hi. caller: i do have a comment, but first i would like to comment on the military. i have a son who is been in the marine service for 12.5 years, and my husband was in the military -- guest: thank you for your family's service. caller: i have to tell you that what disturbs me so much, and that is because i'm passionate about our entire military and what they have done and all the lies that -- lives that and lost, not just military, but even civilian, lives lost and injuries as a result of this whole exercise. i will tell you, what bothers me is our carrier taking osama bin
laden out to sea to bury him like we do for military honors. why should we have done that? to me, that is like stepping on the graves of all the military -- guest: i understand what you are saying. let me see if i can answer that, because i do understand what you are saying. burial at sea is burial at sea. is not necessarily a ceremonial burial at sea. you can bury them in a full funeral celebration, or you can bury them in an unmarked grave. this was unable to cope lent of the letter read the reason that the -- did this was not -- this was the naval equivalent of a letter. the reason that they did this was not to honor osama bin
laden at all. i understand exactly why they did it. as far as treating his body with respect, watching him in accordance with islamic law, trying to do things as respectfully as possible, i think that reflects greatly on our values. the way we treat, especially have a slip through some of the dishonorable practices -- having lived through some of the dishonorable practices with the way we treated detainees -- the way we treat detainees, at the enemy dead, prisoners of war, reflects a lot on american values. the u.s. navy and military in general did this quite well. if i could just close by thanking you and your family for your service to this nation, it is greatly appreciated. thank you. host: andrew exum is a fellow at the center for a new american
security. this piece in "the new york times" -- it quote the chairman of the islamic studies department at american university. "shrines are very powerful. on the other hand, the burial at sea could give rise to speculation about whether bin laden is really get." guest: absolutely right. it is a trade-off. under islamic practices, you want to bury the body in some way within 24 hours. otherwise, it is really seen as being disrespectful. the united states had a need to bury the body quickly. trying to enlist some country, whether it is afghanistan or the saudi arabia to accept the body to be buried on land, would be quite difficult on such short
notice. nobody wants there to be a shrine to osama bin laden in their own countries. the united states made a decision that was based in part on expediency and in part on a thinking through how we prevent some of the martyr shrines for osama bin laden tree again, looking at all the options available to the military and united states government, it was pretty wise. guest: again, it is too early to tell but when it comes to osama been reluctant -- and at a somewhat belated and al qaeda in general, they really have an -- on the -- when it comes to osama bin laden and al qaeda in general, they have really been on the wane. anyone who missed the maelstrom
of the violence of iraq in 2005, 2006, 2007, they saw that al qaeda's victims were not soldiers, they were other moslems, arabs themselves. if you see the way al qaeda conducted a terrorist campaign against saudi arabia in 2005, yemen in 2002, you see that the victims of al qaeda are more often than not not infidel westerners but other observant muslims. al qaeda has been on the wane. if you look at the political movements sweeping the arab- speaking world the past three months, al qaeda has not even been a factor. guest: well, i think a better way -- the shrine we have for
the sacrifices that have been given by u.s. servicemen and intelligence officers is really at the national cemetery, whether you are talking about arlington or even in my hometown of chattanooga. if you want to pay respects to the men and women who have done so much to bring his men to justice, you can just -- to bring this man to justice, you can just go to the tomb of the unknown soldier. host: abu muqawama -- what does that mean? guest: it started as a joke. i was studying in lebanon, and it means "father of resistance." i've spent most of my life fighting in non-state actors on
the battlefield. host: miami, florida, independent- line. caller: thank you, great appreciation to andrew and his service. i commend the way that the united states and the cia kept everything under wraps and waited until everything was just done. i understand we have to have allies and the certain things that the secretary has to say as far as political chatter, but just, my hat is off to these guys. so many years, and just thinking about those poor people burning in the towers, jumping out of windows, the way that -- when i found out, it was late. i woke up my mother and brother. i remember being in the navy and seeing my first seals in my class, and the way they took every guy and his wing and
trained and the right way. it is remarkable for what we as americans can do. we are not going to agree on everything, but when we put our minds to it and put our effort, and the way we gave this guy a proper burial, i hope we can do that for the men and women who went along with us, with the graves at arlington. it has been on the news. i just want to thank every veteran, every person in the department of defense, and thae media. i want to -- i know we have mixed feelings, but it felt great to bring this guy to justice. thank you very much for your service. but navy, the army, civilians, thank you very much, let's keep doing a great job. guest: first off, thank you for your service.
you touched on something that a lot of americans are feeling. this is a moment to feel proud to be an american and feel good about herself this is an acknowledgement that we are harder fights ahead, whether it is u.s. debt or the fight against al qaeda. we hope we can keep the same unity going forward. host: what does this mean for our relationship with pakistan going forward? guest: that is a great question. this is a tremendously embarrassing moment for pakistan. pakistani denialism regarding extremists in pakistan has been a real problem for the united states. on the one hand, if there are any pakistanis watching, the people of pakistan have suffered greatly over the past 10 years and that made some of the biggest sacrifices in this war on terror. i don't want to downplay that.
on the other hand, however, the government of pakistan or elements of the government of pakistan have consciously, deliberately trained and supported and employed a violent nine-state actors in support of pakistani security and political interests, whether you are talking about kashmir or afghanistan. pakistan has to have a reckoning of their support for these violent and on state actors. this is a great time for the united states to really take it to the pakistanis. when the cia contractor raymond davis was convicted in pakistan and arrested for killing two pakistanis in an apparent robbery attempt, pakistan use that as leverage to try to extract concessions from the united states with respect to our drone program, with respect to intelligence personnel within pakistan. now is the time that the tables have turned, and the united
states at this moment needs to make it clear to the pakistanis that things cannot go on as they have. i really do think this is a moment where the nine states as an almost unprecedented degree of leverage -- where the united states has an almost unprecedented degree of leverage. when the details came out about how a somewhat belated was living a mile away from the military academy in -- how osama bin laden was living at a mile away from the military academy in relative comfort, it is not going to look good for pakistan or the intelligence services. the united states should use this as an opportunity to negotiate a new type of partnership for pakistan. we need them, they need us, but things cannot continue the way they've gone so far. host: what did you make of ed in "theop =-
washington post"? guest: i was infuriated by reading it. he was the victim of violent extremists. they killed his wife, benazir bhutto. on the other hand, the chickens have come home to roost. pakistani security services have trained and utilized terror groups in pursuit of pakistani interests, and it has come back to haunt them. host: josh, welcome. caller: i have a question about the long-term impact of the finding of osama bin laden will assist the united states in going forward with its goals. guest: yes, again, one of the things that -- the story that has not been told yet, but which
i mentioned earlier, is the degree to which the intelligence or information that has been found on osama bin laden -- there have been hard drives are paper documents, anything that can be exploited going forward. this has the potential -- for all we know, osama bin laden was day-ured with the a few- old newspapers and hard drives with movies on them. but if there is detail on the hard drives that are captured, other documents that the taken from the scene in abbottabad, the effect on our planning process going forward to try to disrupt and dismantle al qaeda could be highly significant. again, as one intelligence official said, the united states
has been pretty successful since september 11 in disrupting al qaeda and al qaeda activities. we have not been successful in dismantling, much less defeating, al qaeda b. these types of intelligence resources and resources will allow you to go forward and start to dismantle a lot of the command and control networks in al qaeda. that could be potentially devastating for them. host: houston, texas. george, republican. caller: i could not agree more with this gentleman about reviewing our policies with pakistan. i think part of the problem with the united states is that we have that a failure to recognize that you are not really dealing with a state, you are dealing with a collection of tribes that were left in power by the british empire as it pulled out. you have to the critics that the